I think I addressed it already: Just let children be children. Don't try to force them to celebrate any sexual preference. Leave it to the parents when they want to talk to their children about sexuality. Keep sex ed in schools neutral and clear of ideology. Keep drag queens away from children. Be aware that children's attitudes towards their own bodies can change. Therefore, puberty blockers, genital mutilation, etc., must not be done to children.
Read the following 69 times…think of it as a drag show reading event …it pretty much covers your questions Contrary to religious conservatives, I think everyone should be free to live their lives the way they please That includes gay (and trans) people being allowed to marry other adults. That includes no discrimination against gay, lesbian, trans, asexual, whatever people Religions or countries which actively discriminate against or sanction these lifestyles are very wrong, in my opinion. Obviously, more so the harsher the attitudes towards and treatment of people who have minority sexual preferences. E.g. a religion teaching that people who live these lifestyles "go to hell" is a stupid religion. A country that sanctions homosexual behaviour with fines or even the death penalty is medieval, and wrong. However, people in Western societies, or anywhere, should not be FORCED to "celebrate" these lifestyles. Accepting them and being tolerant of them is one thing, but to be FORCED to "celebrate" their sexual preferences for an entire month, OR ELSE YOU WILL BE BRANDED A BIGOT AND A FASCIST is too much. I predict that the more wokies go over the top with trying to shove all this "PRIDE" stuff down people's throats, as in trying to forcefully re-educate the majority, the more people will get fed up with it. So this attempted forceful "re-education towards tolerance" actually breeds more intolerance, because the pendulum will swing back. That's regrettable. If an adult wants to change their appearance, including via chemical castration and/or genital mutilation, in order to appear as a member of the opposite of their actual biological sex, they should be allowed to do it. They should not be ridiculed or discriminated for their choices. They should also not expect to be celebrated for their choices. If asked to do so, people should try to accommodate trans people's wish to be addressed by the gender they attempted to modify their appearance towards. If people address someone by what they appear to be, without hurtful intent, and that happens to be the actual biological gender of the person being addressed, then that is not something to get shamed for. It's just pattern recognition, and despite efforts to pretend someone is not their biological sex, they will often still look and sound more like their biological sex. Except for extremely rare intersex cases, there are only two genders, male and female. If someone tells you there are 72 or whatever genders, they are a ****ing idiot. Pronouns are bullshit, especially "they". Except if someone is actually trans and politely asks the people they interact with to make an attempt to address them as the gender they try to pretend they are. Then one should make an effort to accommodate that person's gender dysphoria. But it's not something that should be enforceable in any way. After all, everyone is just pretending, to make the person in question feel better. Children should be left alone with all things sexual. That should be left to the parents, and only from an older age to some extent also the teachers. Chemical castration, puberty blockers, genital mutilation applied to children must be made illegal. Doctors who practice these things should lose their license and go to jail. Parents who do this to their children should be sanctioned as well. "Gender-affirming care" is a misleading misnomer. It's an attempt at changing the appearance of someone's gender, not affirming the gender. The biological sex cannot be changed. Children should not be FORCED to celebrate "Pride", just like adults should not be forced to do it, but even less so than adults. There is nothing inherently "better" that needs to be celebrated about some people choosing minority sexual preferences. There is also nothing inherently "worse" about it. It is what it is. Leave children alone with it. Draq queen readings in schools are absolutely inappropriate, they are an attempt at indoctrination of young children. Anyone who reads up on it can see that there is an ideological and sexualized twist to this, and children need to be protected from this. Parents who take their children to this or to "pride" events are woke idiots who have a false understanding of what tolerance means, and they are making themselves feel more virtuous at the expense of their children. A lot of gay people, and in fact I believe the majority of gay people, agree with this view.
What does that mean? Play outside and catch bugs? How would you legislate that? Would that preclude religious institutions who celebrate “gods will” in regards to a man and a women? Or we only talking about public education? You seem to be under the impression that children are saluting the pride flag….. What does that mean exactly? Can the parents dictate to society that popular culture can’t mention anything about homosexuality? It’s not ideological to only present heterosexual behavior? Based on what? What about priests and pastors? So conservative society knows what’s best for an individual family? You keep saying children…. So does this mean under 18? Under 13? Or based on when they hit puberty?
And remind me…. What exactly are we protecting the children from? Being raped by gays and transsexuals? Or becoming gay and/or transsexuals? Or both?
Except there are many Christian denominations and churches that support LGBTQ rights. The Episcopal church of America was one of the early institutions to recognize and perform gay marriages. Many Jewish synagogues also support LGBTQ rights and will also perform gay marriages. Israel is very progressive on LGBTQ rights.
All of this stuff about not socializing children has already been discussed. I would take that counter argument more seriously if there also was talk of not seeing media and having children here fairy tales about the princess finding her Prince Charming and living happily ever after. I would also take this argument that it’s just about protecting children and that adults can do what they want if people weren’t flipping out over alcoholic beverage brands advertising using trans influencers or going after adult trans actors.
I'm sure folks online will bring the same energy disparaging Islam they do when disparaging Christianity for its stance on LGBT issues. Oh, wait, they never do that.
If you believe that being gay or transgender or queer is something you "learn" as a child, then I could understand the right's pushback against exposing kids to this stuff. But there's 0 evidence of that. It's more genetic and the brains of LBGTQ are different than the brains of cisgender/heterosexual people. They are truly wired differently. This is about teaching children to accept people different from themselves so they don't grow up to commit hate and violence against a vulnerable group.
I don't hate Catholics. I think the Catholic Church repeatedly and consistently covering up their pedo priests for well over any working memory is ****ed up and needs a strong hand of retribution. I don't hate Muslims either, though a distinction is made between them and Islamists, which I'm assuming is some fundie who locks up their women for "values" or die trying. Yeah, islamists should be strongly censured worse than the Catholic church coverups, but this is the internet...where nuance dies.
I mostly agree with your overall sentiment for young children in school; existing as a sexual being requires physical intimacy with someone else and when the manifestation of homosexuality is sexual acts (just like it is for heterosexuals) I don't think that young children need to be taught the particulars of what that means. I also agree that puberty lessons for kids (we were taught this in fifth grade with parental approval; a key thing I think we agree on, too) should be clinical i.e. "this is what menstruation is and the school nurse has supplies for you". However, I don't think the law should be wide enough to prosecute a homosexual teacher for having photographs of their spouse on their desk and saying "That's my husband/wife" if explicitly asked by a child. Wielding the law against a protected class like that, and not doing the same for heterosexual teachers, is discriminatory. I don't know if any cases like that have been brought against teachers, but my understanding of the Florida law is that it's written broadly enough to pursue that if someone wanted to. I think any high school class that teaches how to practice safe heterosexual sex also needs to discuss homosexual sex. People know that they're homosexual by the time they're between 16-18. It does them a disservice to only be taught how to safely have heterosexual sex they'll never engage in. Furthermore, senior-level sex ed classes have 18-year-old kids who are legal adults. What is the justification for denying legal adults that information? I say this as someone whose HISD high school sex ed class was taught by a disinterested football coach who simply played videos of babies being born and paused the moment the baby's head crowned. Really great education!
I don't think that the law criminalizes that. This is an interpretation that the left built up as a strawman, just like they framed the law as "don't say gay" when neither the spirit nor the actual content of the law actually represents that.
I just read the bill (and I'm sorry to be discussing it here, but there are like a hundred threads on this topic). This line stands out: It think it boils down to how you define "classroom discussion". Does that mean a formal lesson? Or does that include the teacher saying "That's my husband/wife" if asked who is in a photograph on their desk? Reasonable people probably agree that it means a formal lesson. But malicious and litigious people might define "discussion" as "any mention to anyone whatsoever". All it takes is a lawsuit against an individual teacher, who certainly can't afford attorneys fees, to assert that definition in court. It does look like this law's expansion to cover grades K-12 excludes health classes that parents can opt out of. That's a good thing and I'd certainly be calling it discrimination if high school health classes purposefully denied information on homosexuality while covering heterosexuality. This whole subject is tiring and I would guess that most moderate people are exhausted by it and the rhetoric on both sides. This is a country where 56% of people can't afford a $1,000 emergency and 27.5M people don't have health insurance. Can we please solve real problems?
it’s like Independence Day when all these world governments joined America and will smith to fight aliens now it’s all religions fighting against nut choppers cause they are going after their kids @AroundTheWorld they don’t want their kids to be Dylan Mulvaney @ROXRAN @Salvy they want their sons to be like Messi
