Quote:
Originally Posted by Lathum
The law is literally designed to remove any and all mention of LGBTQ from the classroom. How is that not in essence denying the existence?
|
The FL law states below. It does not remove "any and all mention of LGBTQ". It does remove "instruction of (LGBTQ) sexual orientation or gender identity".
Quote:
|
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.
|
In my prior response to you I said below. If you believe "instruction" = "mention" then we'll agree to disagree and the courts will ultimate arbitrate what that means.
Quote:
|
I definitely see "instruction" (and other terms) can be subject to interpretation.
|
Quote:
|
What do you think it's real purpose is? Do you think teachers are pulling pronhub up on the projector and showing tranny pron?
|
I've already mentioned what I believe the purpose was. I'll pull them together for you. See below quotes.
Quote:
|
I do agree there is a strategy in making the wording ambiguous. Its for maximum flexibility to act or not and it is for DeSantis/GOP's benefit.
|
Quote:
|
I think what you are really saying to me is "look, this law isn't about instructing on all sexual orientation or gender identity, it is really about instructing on LGBTQ sexual orientation or gender identity", I agree with you. It really is that regardless of the more neutral wording in the law. I'm still okay with leaving those discussions for parents to handle for 3rd graders and below.
|
Quote:
|
There is no doubt it is for political gain. Absolutely no doubt. Part of that is for DeSantis to show he is fighting back (imaginary or not) against the wokeness which plays to his (and Trump's) base.
|
It still does not belie the fact (IMO) that some topics are better left for parents to discuss with a 3rd grader vs some public school teacher.
Question for you. You believe the law's use of "instruction" is equal to your definition of "mention" as per how you used it above?