[Flasch186]

You’re conflating the article and the statute

The article is simply showing you the reality of the bill cascading over the state

You admitted the statute was created for this exact purpose of playing to the exact category and feelings of the fearful right previously, yet now you’re playing the “they’re not specifically mentioning lgbtq+?” If that’s not disingenuous and moving goal posts I don’t know what is.

No one is talking about the feelings of the kids in the statute

We’re talking about mention/instruction and you parsed the heck out of that and teachers have to steer clear of anything close to touching on anything to do with sex, sexuality, gender, etc for fear that a snowflake that calls others snowflakes will sue because someone introduced the same sex lunch bringer as their husband or wife.

If a kids suicidal and a teacher know it or suspects it there’s protocols in place

You’re just throwing spaghetti against a wall to make up for the fact that you’re afraid that a teacher, in a position of mentorship, might have a lifestyle or acceptance if lifestyles that are anything but the expected.

That’s not what’s in the statute and you admitted that it will be cleaned up in the courts and the argument of that is just crap because on the way to the court house the teacher lost their career, lost their privacy and possibly lost their life.

All because the pol played to the base that can’t stop being scared of everything that isn’t exactly like them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk