LGBT, LGBTQ, LGBT+ Thread (1 Viewer)

[squistion]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Point made. CNN link. LOL that's funny

CNN link. LOL that's funny

Washington Post says the exact same thing, perhaps you'll find that amusing too (didn't post it earlier because subscriber content only)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/05/24/he-couldnt-say-gay-graduation-speech/

 

[The Commish]

I thought we'd moved on from a lot of that, but I guess we haven't

Curious why you would have believed that? I don't want to "attack the poster" but I would think it needs a bit eternal optimism on who people are that I don't read into your posts. Am I misreading them? Or do you think that maybe in real life you are more optimistic about where people are than the PSF allows to get through?

Personally, I think we are still in the backlash phase from having Gay Marriage imposed upon the masses (which by the time it happened were a shrinking minority). Part of this backlash is digging in on other battles not yet fought. While the world hasn't crumbled, or "gone to hell in a handbasket" with Gay Marriage I didn't see a lot of reflection on other similar issues going on. Which is why I am asking.

My head races when you ask me these questions because I think I'm still trying to gauge where we are as a nation. Typically, I don't consider myself an optimist and I am completely caught off guard by people who genuinely believe racism in this country has been sufficiently addressed when I run across them, so I understand your confusion. It just seemed to me that the "gay marriage" stuff went by the wayside like the "interracial marriage" did. And I if I had to point to one thing that made me believe that is/was truer than it might be is my own shift in attitude on "gay marriage". I just figure if a lunk head like me will get it, everyone will get it.

Perhaps you are correct and we still haven't moved as far on gay marriage as I give us credit for.

ETA: I'll also just throw out there, that if people would stay away from the cute, one-liner gotcha nicknames, that wouldn't provide the rock for people to hide behind while deflecting.

 

[BladeRunner]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. Nowhere in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

 

[BladeRunner]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Point made. CNN link. LOL that's funny

CNN link. LOL that's funny

Washington Post says the exact same thing, perhaps you'll find that amusing too (didn't post it earlier because subscriber content only)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/05/24/he-couldnt-say-gay-graduation-speech/

"My biased sources all say the same thing so they must be true because they wouldn't ever lie or try to mislead me to push an agenda"

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

if people would stay away from the cute, one-liner gotcha nicknames, that wouldn't provide the rock for people to hide behind while deflecting.

I'll never understand this. They're lies - not cute nicknames - lies. And some people never get angry at the liars - they just get angry at the ones calling out the lies.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I'll also just throw out there, that if people would stay away from the cute, one-liner gotcha nicknames, that wouldn't provide the rock for people to hide behind while deflecting.

Thanks for the rest of the reply. I don't think that the powers that be around here will allow me to refer to you as "lump head" though.

As for this, I think one-liners are just too effective. And they tend to be most effective to counter ideas that simply don't fit into one-liners or shouldn't.

 

[squistion]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

The bill seems to talk about all sexual preferences not just gay. Why does anyone need to talk about their sexual preferences in school with young children?

 

[John123]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

As previously noted, heterosexual people don't go around talking about being heterosexual. And it wasn't about a "school setting". The incident you mentioned was related to the person's graduation speech. Why do you lefties do that? Take a very specific case and pretend it applies to ALL situations. This HS senior is more than welcome to discuss their letters in the hallways at school, probably even in term papers for the appropriate subjects. They are just not allowed to do it in a graduation speech.

 

[squistion]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

The bill seems to talk about all sexual preferences not just gay. Why does anyone need to talk about their sexual preferences in school with young children?

I am sure a heterosexual won't be prohibited from mentioning that he or she has a husband or a wife. That HS student probably could have talked about his girlfriend if he was straight at that commencement ceremony but couldn't touch on anything regarding his homosexuality.

 

[squistion]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

As previously noted, heterosexual people don't go around talking about being heterosexual. And it wasn't about a "school setting". The incident you mentioned was related to the person's graduation speech. Why do you lefties do that? Take a very specific case and pretend it applies to ALL situations. This HS senior is more than welcome to discuss their letters in the hallways at school, probably even in term papers for the appropriate subjects. They are just not allowed to do it in a graduation speech.

A HS commencement is "school setting" related, or at least enough in this case to prohibit any mention directly or indirectly of his being gay.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

The bill seems to talk about all sexual preferences not just gay. Why does anyone need to talk about their sexual preferences in school with young children?

I am sure a heterosexual won't be prohibited from mentioning that he or she has a husband or a wife. That HS student probably could have talked about his girlfriend if he was straight at that commencement ceremony but couldn't touch on anything regarding his homosexuality.

So you're mucking up this thread with baseless speculation instead of the facts of the bill?

 

[squistion]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

The bill seems to talk about all sexual preferences not just gay. Why does anyone need to talk about their sexual preferences in school with young children?

I am sure a heterosexual won't be prohibited from mentioning that he or she has a husband or a wife. That HS student probably could have talked about his girlfriend if he was straight at that commencement ceremony but couldn't touch on anything regarding his homosexuality.

So you're mucking up this thread with baseless speculation instead of the facts of the bill?

It isn't baseless speculation as I have yet to see one report of it, unlike that of the HS senior (which I don't think was an isolated incident).

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

The bill seems to talk about all sexual preferences not just gay. Why does anyone need to talk about their sexual preferences in school with young children?

I am sure a heterosexual won't be prohibited from mentioning that he or she has a husband or a wife. That HS student probably could have talked about his girlfriend if he was straight at that commencement ceremony but couldn't touch on anything regarding his homosexuality.

So you're mucking up this thread with baseless speculation instead of the facts of the bill?

It isn't baseless speculation as I have yet to see one report of it, unlike that of the HS senior (which I don't think was an isolated incident).

You have no proof of it happening but need to see reports? Weird schtick here. You basically made up lies about the bill.

 

[BladeRunner]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

Despite you clutching to one erroneous, anecdotal report the bill still doesn't allow ANY mentions regardless of gender. You also realize that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, right?


You can't be this obtuse, can you?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

So you're mucking up this thread with baseless speculation instead of the facts of the bill?

Is not largely baseless speculation as to what is happening day to day in public schools exactly what these bills are all about? Not really impacting much of anything is why I said earlier that democrats should clean up the language of the federal bill and pass it.

 

[BladeRunner]

So you're mucking up this thread with baseless speculation instead of the facts of the bill?

Is not largely baseless speculation as to what is happening day to day in public schools exactly what these bills are all about? Not really impacting much of anything is why I said earlier that democrats should clean up the language of the federal bill and pass it.

Sure it is. It's the very definition of "baseless".

 

[squistion]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

The bill seems to talk about all sexual preferences not just gay. Why does anyone need to talk about their sexual preferences in school with young children?

I am sure a heterosexual won't be prohibited from mentioning that he or she has a husband or a wife. That HS student probably could have talked about his girlfriend if he was straight at that commencement ceremony but couldn't touch on anything regarding his homosexuality.

So you're mucking up this thread with baseless speculation instead of the facts of the bill?

It isn't baseless speculation as I have yet to see one report of it, unlike that of the HS senior (which I don't think was an isolated incident).

You have no proof of it happening but need to see reports? Weird schtick here. You basically made up lies about the bill.a

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

 

[John123]

A HS commencement is "school setting" related, or at least enough in this case to prohibit any mention directly or indirectly of his being gay.

It's a subset of the term "school setting." It's a specific instance. When you say "school setting" you imply a wide array of situations when this student was prohibited from discussing something in ONE very specific and formal setting - a graduation speech. Just stop it.

 

[BladeRunner]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or any other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

The bill seems to talk about all sexual preferences not just gay. Why does anyone need to talk about their sexual preferences in school with young children?

I am sure a heterosexual won't be prohibited from mentioning that he or she has a husband or a wife. That HS student probably could have talked about his girlfriend if he was straight at that commencement ceremony but couldn't touch on anything regarding his homosexuality.

So you're mucking up this thread with baseless speculation instead of the facts of the bill?

It isn't baseless speculation as I have yet to see one report of it, unlike that of the HS senior (which I don't think was an isolated incident).

You have no proof of it happening but need to see reports? Weird schtick here. You basically made up lies about the bill.a

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

He couldn’t discuss being Hetero either

 

[squistion]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

 

[The Commish]

I'll also just throw out there, that if people would stay away from the cute, one-liner gotcha nicknames, that wouldn't provide the rock for people to hide behind while deflecting.

Thanks for the rest of the reply. I don't think that the powers that be around here will allow me to refer to you as "lump head" though.

As for this, I think one-liners are just too effective. And they tend to be most effective to counter ideas that simply don't fit into one-liners or shouldn't.

I mean, the argument against this is literally "it doesn't say you can't say gay anywhere in this bill....LIES!!!!!!!!" completely ignoring that in all practical terms the law has proven to be a major damper on discussion about anything "gay". The next article anyone provides me outlining the "concern" of a teacher/school district discussing heterosexual relationships, loved ones, concepts etc here in Florida will be the first. And this kind of crap bill will continue to "work" until people are brave enough to bring suits forcing the judges to do the work the legislature wasn't willing to do.

All that to say, why waste the time on that sort of thing, just call it the "Parents Rights...." bill and move on so the focus can be on your point instead of the deflections in the nonsense above? All this is is another variation of "that gay marriage law is just fine. It makes no distinction between heterosexual women OR homosexual women from marrying each other....neither can." arguments we heard a few short years ago.

 

[matttyl]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

 

[The Commish]

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

This latest one does. The one that already exists goes all the way through middle school. All this most recent one did was generate political theater. Well, that and a requirement that teachers potentially out their students to their parents.

 

[squistion]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Heterosexual people talk about being heterosexual all the time. Otherwise someone might think they were gay.

 

[BladeRunner]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Again, you're moving the goalposts. We all were specifically talking about LGBTQA people,. as were you because you literally called it the "Don't say Gay bill" and said that it specifically targets them. SPECIFICALLY. It does not have any of that language you say it does about them.

Again, let me be clear: You're purposefully lying.

 

[squistion]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Again, you're moving the goalposts. We all were specifically talking about LGBTQA people,. as were you because you literally called it the "Don't say Gay bill" and said that it specifically targets them. SPECIFICALLY. It does not have any of that language you say it does about them.

Again, let me be clear: You're purposefully lying.

It doesn't have to have the specific language if that is the end result. I am not lying.

 

[BladeRunner]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Again, you're moving the goalposts. We all were specifically talking about LGBTQA people,. as were you because you literally called it the "Don't say Gay bill" and said that it specifically targets them. SPECIFICALLY. It does not have any of that language you say it does about them.

Again, let me be clear: You're purposefully lying.

It doesn't have to have the specific language if that is the end result. I am not lying.

You are lying about it. No doubt. That's not debatable at this point.

 

[squistion]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Again, you're moving the goalposts. We all were specifically talking about LGBTQA people,. as were you because you literally called it the "Don't say Gay bill" and said that it specifically targets them. SPECIFICALLY. It does not have any of that language you say it does about them.

Again, let me be clear: You're purposefully lying.

It doesn't have to have the specific language if that is the end result. I am not lying.

You are lying about it. No doubt. That's not debatable at this point.

No isn't debatable after I specifically said the bill doesn't is not literally titled "Don't Say Gay" although that is practical effect.

 

[matttyl]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

How could it? Like saying the ban on sales of alcohol to minors is effecting me, in my 40s. It doesn’t.

 

[squistion]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

How could it? Like saying the ban on sales of alcohol to minors is effecting me, in my 40s. It doesn’t.

Your analogy makes absolutely no sense.

 

[matttyl]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

How could it? Like saying the ban on sales of alcohol to minors is effecting me, in my 40s. It doesn’t.

Your analogy makes absolutely no sense.

I guess I’m missing your point then, and forgive me if I came into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay?

 

[squistion]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

How could it? Like saying the ban on sales of alcohol to minors is effecting me, in my 40s. It doesn’t.

Your analogy makes absolutely no sense.

I guess I’m missing your point then, and forgive me if I came into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay?

Unless I’m totally missing your point.

You are. This bill was not supposed to impact him but the overreach involved by his HS principal did, and he was not allowed to talk about being gay or his gay activism.

 

[parasaurolophus]

me into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay

However, Moricz had been warned that his microphone would be cut off if he made any mention or reference to the law that goes into effect in July or any reference to his activist efforts on LGBTQ rights.

Oh noooes. Kid cant get up there and get politicial at his high school graduation.

He organized a walkout and whined all the time. Then he went to the press with this garbage.

 

[BladeRunner]

me into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay

However, Moricz had been warned that his microphone would be cut off if he made any mention or reference to the law that goes into effect in July or any reference to his activist efforts on LGBTQ rights.

Oh noooes. Kid cant get up there and get politicial at his high school graduation.

He organized a walkout and whined all the time. Then he went to the press with this garbage.

And guess who immediately ran in here screaming about the alphabet people not having any rights and being discriminated against?

 

[squistion]

me into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay

However, Moricz had been warned that his microphone would be cut off if he made any mention or reference to the law that goes into effect in July or any reference to his activist efforts on LGBTQ rights.

Oh noooes. Kid cant get up there and get politicial at his high school graduation.

He organized a walkout and whined all the time. Then he went to the press with this garbage.

And guess who immediately ran in here screaming about the alphabet people not having any rights and being discriminated against?

And guess who immediately ran in here screaming about the alphabet people not having any rights and being discriminated against?

Who are the alphabet people? What exactly do you mean by that as it seems pejorative.

 

[Summer Wheat]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

Have hetros mentioned their sexuality in graduation speeches?

 

[squistion]

I’m old enough to remember when talking to 3rd graders about sex was something frowned upon by 99% of the population. How that morphed into a platform agenda of the Democratic Party is mind boggling.

It still is. Acknowledging that LGBT+ people exist in the world is not talking about sex.

No one is doing that.

Except in Florida with the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill, which Republicans are now trying to go national with:

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs

The bill’s definition of “sexually-oriented material” includes anything that relates to sexual orientation or gender identity.

www.nbcnews.com

A national 'Don't Say Gay' law? Republicans introduce bill to restrict LGBTQ-related programs​

[...]

The bill defines “sexually-oriented material” as “any depiction, description, or simulation of sexual activity, any lewd or lascivious depiction or description of human genitals, or any topic involving gender identity, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, sexual orientation, or related subjects.”

[...]


If someone's sexual orientation is mentioned that makes it fall under the category of "sexually-oriented material" and as such, would be a prohibited topic.

You keep repeating this nonsense as if it's true. No where does it say "gay". Sounds to me like you can't say "heterosexual" either.

I mean, no matter how many OPINION pieces you try to use to affirm your point, that's all they are - opinions. The law says no such thing about the alphabet mob.

Fun Fact:

Someone who is identified as being gay or lesbian (by themselves or others, directly or indirectly) is describing a sexual orientation, so it achieves the same result without specifying that the actual words gay or lesbian are used.

ACTUAL FUN FACT: Your OPINION (and incorrect interpretation) is not fact. Never has been, never will be.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ. In fact, one could say you can't say HETEROSEXUAL either. Seems fair.

Nowhere in the bill does it say anything specifically about LGBTQ

So LGBTQ is not considered a sexual orientation? Yeah, right.

Incorrect again.

Fun Fact: your opinion is NOT fact.

Sorry, but being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation and has been so since the term entered the lexicon.

Fun Fact: Your opinion doesn't make ANYTHING fact. No where in the Bill does it specify alphabet people. or non-alphabet people for that matter.

I did not state an opinion, I stated a fact, which is that being gay or lesbian is considered a sexual orientation.

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion
noun

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Except that's not what we are debating. You conveniently moved the goalposts and then argued against the new position of the posts after the old position proved you were flat out wrong.

The debate has been and always will be your misinterpretation (willfully or ignorantly - unsure) of the bill by calling it the "Don't say Gay Bill" and saying it exclusively singles out the alphabet crew despite the Bill not having ANY of the language you insist it does.

The media called it the dont say gay law. Squish only repeats what his media tells him to repeat. Come on, you guys should that by now

The media called it the dont say gay law.

No that was not the title of the law but that is the practical and real world effect.

Recall that I posted in the so called "Don't Say Gay" thread, about the HS Class President in Florida who was a gay activist and was told by the principal if that he talked about being gay and/or his activism, the mic would be cut, so he creatively had to work around it.

A Florida class president couldn't discuss being gay in high school graduation speech -- so he talked about his curly hair | CNN

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn't allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state's so-called "Don't Say Gay" law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his...

www.cnn.com

The class president at a Florida high school says he wasn’t allowed to share his experience as a gay student in his graduation speech or how the state’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law will affect students like him, so he talked about something else that makes him a little different from his classmates – his curly hair.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

So, bottom line, you were wrong previously as you are now. You're making things up to provide drama and hyperbole. No where in the bill does it specifically single out any group. ANY group, including heterosexuals, homosexuals or anyone else.

Practical effect will be that "heterosexual" won't be allowed either.

Hasn't been so far.

No reports of anyone in Florida being prevented from mentioning their heterosexuality in a school setting, unlike the gay Florida HS senior.

Have hetros mentioned their sexuality in graduation speeches?

Have hetros mentioned their sexuality in graduation speeches?

I am almost 100% sure that some might have mentioned a girlfriend, perhaps as being supportive...but I haven't made a Google search...

 

[matttyl]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

How could it? Like saying the ban on sales of alcohol to minors is effecting me, in my 40s. It doesn’t.

Your analogy makes absolutely no sense.

I guess I’m missing your point then, and forgive me if I came into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay?

Unless I’m totally missing your point.

You are. This bill was not supposed to impact him but the overreach involved by his HS principal did, and he was not allowed to talk about being gay or his gay activism.

Sounds like your issue isn’t with the law at all then, but rather with what the principal may or may not have said to him. Is there any proof that any of that was stated to him, and if it was, why didn’t the activist immediately seek legal assistance? Like I said, the law wasn’t even a law yet, and even if it was, it didn’t impact him at all.

 

[squistion]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

How could it? Like saying the ban on sales of alcohol to minors is effecting me, in my 40s. It doesn’t.

Your analogy makes absolutely no sense.

I guess I’m missing your point then, and forgive me if I came into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay?

Unless I’m totally missing your point.

You are. This bill was not supposed to impact him but the overreach involved by his HS principal did, and he was not allowed to talk about being gay or his gay activism.

Sounds like your issue isn’t with the law at all then, but rather with what the principal may or may not have said to him. Is there any proof that any of that was stated to him, and if it was, why didn’t the activist immediately seek legal assistance? Like I said, the law wasn’t even a law yet, and even if it was, it didn’t impact him at all.

rather with what the principal may or may not have said to him. Is there any proof that any of that was stated to him

Yes, in that thread, there was an admission by the principal that confirmed what I posted IIRC.

 

[:deadbevo:]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

How could it? Like saying the ban on sales of alcohol to minors is effecting me, in my 40s. It doesn’t.

Your analogy makes absolutely no sense.

I guess I’m missing your point then, and forgive me if I came into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay?

Unless I’m totally missing your point.

You are. This bill was not supposed to impact him but the overreach involved by his HS principal did, and he was not allowed to talk about being gay or his gay activism.

Do you generally judge a bill/law by the examples of overreach?

 

[:deadbevo:]

Belongs here

 

[squistion]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

How could it? Like saying the ban on sales of alcohol to minors is effecting me, in my 40s. It doesn’t.

Your analogy makes absolutely no sense.

I guess I’m missing your point then, and forgive me if I came into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay?

Unless I’m totally missing your point.

You are. This bill was not supposed to impact him but the overreach involved by his HS principal did, and he was not allowed to talk about being gay or his gay activism.

Do you generally judge a bill/law by the examples of overreach?

Do you generally judge a bill/law by the examples of overreach?

Yes, because quite often, as in this case, it was anticipated and correctly predicted. One should always consider the worst case scenario.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Yes, because quite often, as in this case, it was anticipated and correctly predicted. One should always consider the worst case scenario.

But it wasn't overreach or worst case scenario. The only link to the law regarding the speech was that the kid in question was going to turn it into a protest of the law.

We don't remove speed limits because people are mad about the speed limit. And we wouldn't blame the speed limit if somebody was told that they couldn't waste the schools time whining about the speed limit.

You have misrepresented this situation.

 

[jon_mx]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

How could it? Like saying the ban on sales of alcohol to minors is effecting me, in my 40s. It doesn’t.

Your analogy makes absolutely no sense.

I guess I’m missing your point then, and forgive me if I came into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay?

Unless I’m totally missing your point.

You are. This bill was not supposed to impact him but the overreach involved by his HS principal did, and he was not allowed to talk about being gay or his gay activism.

Do you generally judge a bill/law by the examples of overreach?

Do you generally judge a bill/law by the examples of overreach?

Yes, because quite often, as in this case, it was anticipated and correctly predicted. One should always consider the worst case scenario.

So after weeks of raking me over the coals for posting numerous acetotal examples, you post this acedotal case which had nothing to do with the law which only really confirms that you are completely wrong about the law.

 

[squistion]

No I didn't make up anything about the bill. Proof is the article (see WaPo and CNN links above) about the HS Commencement speaker, he literally couldn't say that he was gay or discuss his gay activism.

Yes, you did. You clearly lied about what the bill says. The bill itself says no such thing about heterosexual or homosexual or an other "ual".

Let me clear: You're lying.

Not lying. It specifically mentions sexual orientation:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

"Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."

Doesn’t that only apply to kindergarten through grade 3?

It is supposed to, but it had a chilling effect on this HS senior's commencement speech.

How could it? Like saying the ban on sales of alcohol to minors is effecting me, in my 40s. It doesn’t.

Your analogy makes absolutely no sense.

I guess I’m missing your point then, and forgive me if I came into this conversation late. You bring up a high school graduate who was apparently unable to speak about being gay at his graduation because of a law that only affects those from kindergarten through the third grade.

How does that law impact him and his speech? About the same way that not selling alcohol to minors impacts me - it doesn’t. Unless I’m totally missing your point.

ETA - moreover, it wasn’t even law yet. The graduation was in May, the law didn’t take effect until July 1. So you’re saying that a future law that wouldn’t even impact him kept this graduate from talking about being gay?

Unless I’m totally missing your point.

You are. This bill was not supposed to impact him but the overreach involved by his HS principal did, and he was not allowed to talk about being gay or his gay activism.

Do you generally judge a bill/law by the examples of overreach?

Do you generally judge a bill/law by the examples of overreach?

Yes, because quite often, as in this case, it was anticipated and correctly predicted. One should always consider the worst case scenario.

So after weeks of raking me over the coals for posting numerous acetotal examples, you post this acedotal case which had nothing to do with the law which only really confirms that you are completely wrong about the law.

Your anecdotal examples seem to be always just a YouTube clip with a one person narrative about their personal experience, unlike what I posted, which is an actual story that got national wide attention as it was seen as a logical consequence of the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill.

 

[John123]

Your anecdotal examples seem to be always just a YouTube clip with a one person narrative about their personal experience, unlike what I posted, which is an actual story that got national wide attention as it was seen as a logical consequence of the so called "Don't Say Gay" bill.

Your anecdotes are more significant because the MSM made a big deal about them? I don't think the MSM's choice of stories is what determines whether an anecdote has any value.

 

[the moops]

Have hetros mentioned their sexuality in graduation speeches?

Are you honestly thinking that this was the reason for this law? That there were too many people mentioning their opposite sex significant other and it made people uncomfortable?