“Parental Rights in Education empowers Florida’s parents and safeguards our children,” said Lieutenant Governor Jeanette Nuñez. “This bill refuses to allow school boards and teachers unions the ability to hide information about students from their parents. In addition, it prohibits classroom discussion in grades K-3 on gender orientation and sexual identity."
“The government should never take the place of a parent,” said Speaker Chris Sprowls. “We’re taking a firm stand in Florida for parents when we say instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation does not belong in the classroom where 5- and 6-year-old children are learning. It should be up to the parent to decide if and when to introduce these sensitive topics. This shouldn’t be controversial, and a majority of Americans agree. Only fanatics think the classroom curriculum from kindergarten through 3rd grade should include teaching little children about gender identity.”
It’s a start but frank I think 3rd grade is too young. They’re only 9 years old at that age.
When I think back to sex Ed in high school it was pretty clean. This is a penis, this is a vagina, these are condoms, this is birth control and how it’s used, this is how people get pregnant, these are STD’s what they do and how you get them. Every flavor of profligate sexuality was not discussed. No one needs to know or discuss the subject, even at that age. Let kids be kids. The sexual tastes of others are not the problem of the one who doesn’t have those tastes to learn about. It doesn’t need to be discussed at all. What’s next, instructions for how to perform fellatio perfectly?
So I’m overall very pleased with this bill, but I wish they at least extended the age to HS.
It is clear that 2 things are occurring. LGBTQ is looking for recruits and that’s why this stuff is even being mentioned at all. It’s indoctrination. The other thing is the left wants to discuss it earlier because they view people who practice these forms of degenerate sexuality as minorities. They want everyone to think s boy wearing a girls dress is perfectly ok. It’s not. It goes against God and nature. Maybe it’s not something that’s to be accepted. I don’t condone bullying but maybe if people who do such things are treated like circus freaks…well if the shoe fits right? Boys wearing make up and dresses. I suppose if you put yourself in that boat and get picked on it’s at least half your fault. They want to steer the minds of these children by introducing material they do not yet possess the faculties to process. Put that idea in them when they’re young, when they aren’t old enough yet to reason about such things. At 9 you’re still trying to figure out if you line GI Joe or Star Wars action figures more. This should be for the parents to discuss. It’s the parents right to teach their children. To be angry about not being able to indoctrinate children to perversity is vile.
““No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord.” Deuteronomy 23:1 ESV
““A woman shall not wear a man’s garment, nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.” Deuteronomy 22:5 ESV
Between the looking for recruits bulshit and the Bible references you can tell exactly where the writer of this horrible post is coming from. Bigotry anyone?
Exactly right. I do discriminate against moral degenerates. I have no desire to accept everyone and everything, nor does God. Neither God not I are all inclusive.
Yeah, I am a bigot I suppose in regards to this matter. What of it? Should I accept Pedos and those who engage in zoophilia too? For what reason do 5 or 7 or 9 year olds need to learn about these things?
The actual bill is almost comically milktoast- it really doesn't do as much as a serious anti-child sexualization/groomer measure should since it only goes up to 3rd grade. The creeps and ignorant morons pouring out of the woodwork to oppose something that they obviously haven't read has probably done a lot more for the country as a whole now that everyone knows who to watch out for. And of course while one part of opposition insists that it's ultimately a pointless power grab over something that "isn't happening," the ever-wise public school teachers of the country including many from Florida have taken to TikTok (as such modern luminaries often do...) and their meltdowns over not being able to talk to their kindergarteners about their (often deviant but even straight) sex lives ad nauseum have pretty much completely validated demand for the bill.
I pointed out back when people first started talking about the bill that Georgia had just passed an almost identical law and nobody said a word about it. The real goal seems to be attacking governor Ron DeSantis because he has established himself as a clear favorite for a future presidential run.
I think the tactic is a good one. We must do what the pinkos have done. Little by little they have inserted their doctrines in bills and everywhere in society for 50-60 years. They didn’t go for the one punch knock out. So we too must be “progressives.” First we limit it to 9 year olds. Then after a few years limit it to 12 year olds, then 15 year olds. Then eventually throw it out of the schools like it used to be and say: “if you want to lean about this do it on your own.” We must progress back to sanity.
Also merely I introducing this exposes these people. They object to 9 year olds not learning about this? I’d hope that sets off alarm bells in everyone’s head. It takes indoctrination out of the realm of speculation and into reality as people actually.
What adults do is there business through I may not agree with their choices, and I’m certain not everyone agrees with mine which is ok, but teaching this to children is no one’s business.
It' best to let the parent know what you're teaching. Children around this age don't need to know any of this. They're only kids once and innocent for a very short time. Let them enjoy it while it lasts. There will be plenty of time later on in life for them to find that out.
@Juxtapose That's the problem though, the law is formulated to ban things that first of all has nothing to do with grooming. And that also is thing that some of us think they *should* learn for their own safety and well-being.
@Juxtapose Gender orientation and sexual identity is *also* a part of childrens day to day life, with or without this bill. Some of them may have parents that's two mothers or two fathers. Or they might have neighbors or friends who are. Some of them might indeed feel like the opposite gender themselves already and be really confused and might take damage from not knowing about this and growing up with this confusion. Some might in secret be taught that gay or trans people are evil in other contexts outside of school and might *need* to learn about this stuff to avoid growing up hating other humans that's just different, like certain lawmakers seems to be doing... The law isn't limited to demanding that parents have to know what is going on in school. Nor is it limited to students not learning things against the parents will. It's a politically motivated attempt stopping people from learning the viewpoints of people these politicians dissagree with, and it's a attempt at grooming kids into becoming good little bigots (and presumably more likely to become Republicans) by keeping them ignorant, even against the will of their parents. The law would have made more sense if it demanded that parents should know about what's going on and had the option to opt out or opt in, but it's a much wider reaching law then that. And the law is downright wrong as it stands.
@Jixtapose Because you think they're never exposed to sexual topics in their lives or might take damage from it? They've probably seen their family pets have sex already, or a farm animal if they live on a farm. And they have genders already, quite frankly children are sexual beings too. Sure, I agree with you that they can't consent to sex and that sex is bad for them and is illegal for a good reason. But knowing and understanding the world around them is important regardless of age. And here in Europe we *do* have targeted sex ed for children that age, made by the government and goverment agencies, and not harmful in any way.
@Juxtapose Sex ed is important for children of all ages of the same exact reason as the age of consent is. It's about protecting them. I get that you might not see that growing up in the US with the dysfunctional sex ed present there. But our sex ed here helps *protect* our children. Learning things in school means that they can take better decisions to protect themselves.
People start having sex later on average in Norway then in the US despite having a lower age of consent. We have far fewer cases of teenage pregnancies. Fewer rapes pr capita then the US in our statistics despite fewer people reporting reservations against talking with the police about the topic. Less abortions etc.
Teaching people about sex and legalizing their options genuinely works at reducing all of the downsides that conservatives always worry about.
@Losalt "quite frankly children are sexual beings too."
I get that you are trying to come from a good place but good lord man, are you even looking at what you're typing?
Children and sexuality do not mix. If the child has questions then it should be addressed in an age-appropriate way by the parent.. I don't know what kind of 5-year-olds you are hanging around but I barely knew about kissing let alone fucking when I was 5. I didn't know about any of this gender identity crap, and all I needed to be taught about homos or other races is that they exist and have the right to exist like everybody else.
"This guy and that guy love each other like Mommy and Daddy love each other, get it son?"
You don't have to let sjw weirdos brainwash kids, the parents can handle that discussion just fine and if the parents do not then by the time the kid hits puberty they will have been educated fully in sex ed. You don't live in the usa, you don't know how bad these sjws are and how hard they are trying to indoctrinate next generation. Indoctrinating children is a very potent political tactic and I would argue the extreme left is the best at it. I am a classical liberal for reference, not a conservative.
@Juxtapose With liberal you mean libertarian right? Or libertarian left? There's studies that shows that kids are also sexual beings, but there's very little research on the topic because it's a taboo in so many countries to even address the issue that no one usually stops to question the assumption that kids are somehow pure white slabs. "tabula rasa" just doesn't apply in this context.
I agree about the idea that these topics should be addressed in a age appropriate manner. But parents are the *least* qualified for that particular job you can get. Especially given the absolute shambles that the US education said parents where subjected to actually is...
As for 5 year olds, I don't remember being 5, but I remember watching and enjoying adult science programs at 6, about things like genetically modification of embryos etc. And that I *did* meet up with a girl to compare in the bathroom of the "preschool" I guess you can call it.
We don't have the SJW thing because quite frankly a lot of what you guys think of as SJW points of view is the "conservative" view here. Our first female representative to our parliament was from a joint party list by our conservatives and our liberals and she got into our parliament in 1911. One of the ministers from the conservatives last term is openly gay and has represented Norway internationally with his boyfriend, etc. We don't have those SJW thing for the simple reason that it's laid back and non-controversial with most of those topics here.
@Juxtapose Honestly a lot of what the "far left" of the like of Bernie Sanders etc in the US argue for is honestly the current status quo here and fairly centrist for us.
Don't get me wrong. Like most Americans he doesn't fully grasp the nordic model. So there's aspects of his views that isn't held by anyone here. But it's mostly nuances rather than huge differences.
Trying to bring up all the.1% of the population woke causes isn't the schools job. I know they THINK it is and all the PC, woke, social warriors out there want all the kids indoctrinated to their causes but their job is to prepare the kids to think and problem solve and to be able to compete with all the other kids of the world for a job... Chinese kids, Indian kids, Korean kids, European kids...
These fringe, activist causes are not on the table for our kids. I know to the leftist, intellectuals... the family is an inconvenience to them... they don't think the family should have any say in their kids lives. Just shut up and let the state indoctrinate all the social, political, controversial, fringe agendas they want... to raise a bunch of literal radical, woke future activists.
The problem with this bill is that the people who wrote it were overly broad in their language.
For example, the phrase "classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3..." This actually prevents teachers from talking about what makes a boy a boy, and what makes a girl a girl, as well as what each gender prefers doing. In short, the bill that sought to ban "LGBTQ+ indoctrination" actually bans Christian teachers from teaching traditional Christian gender roles.
Then of course there is the provision that parents can sue school boards that violate the bill. Who funds the school boards except the state? Who is on the hook for school board debts if the school board cannot pay? The state is therefore permitting its citizens to sue itself. States have the authority over education within their state; why use this runaround involving lawsuits that could potentially cost yourself millions? Just use your own authority over your own schools. The only people who benefit from this are lawyers.
It worries me that people who are this bad at writing laws are in charge in Florida. You're a lawmaker, shouldn't you be competent at writing laws?
On the contrary, grade K-3 school is actually about teaching social expectations, like how to behave appropriately in society, how to take turns, how to hold a conversation with someone, how to work in groups, and other things like that. There's a little bit about learning how to read and basic arithmetic, but very few children younger than nine have enough patience to learn about history and that. Developing that patience is part of the social expectations that are taught in those grade levels. You might argue that gender roles play a part in social expectations.
If you want to make it clearer to the parents what kids are being taught, I'm all for that. If you want to stop the sociopolitical indoctrination schools are allegedly doing (and if it's true), then I can support that- but you need to replace it with something BETTER, not just something DIFFERENT. Otherwise, kids are going to learn this from either the internet, or other kids.
When little Johnny hears the word "gay" on the playground and wonders what it means, he's going to ask his teacher. If his teacher gives a vague but age-appropriate response, his curiosity probably won't be satisfied (not if it's worth a damn, at least), but he'll have AN answer, which will likely suffice for the time being. If he's told "I can't tell you that", he'll be intrigued, and either wind up looking it up himself, or asking a kid who can (very few parents are both thorough and vicious enough to keep kids from finding things out online; if you are, your neighbors aren't). And that's how little Johnny leans about DVDA before he learns about subtraction.
I don't want people sexually grooming kids to abuse them, but I also don't want laws based around child psychology written by people who've clearly never interacted with a child. Set a better standard, and work with that.
If they ask, they want to know. If they aren't told when they ask, they'll find out on their own. Pretending otherwise is showing you don't understand how children's minds work. Let kids be kids.
It's so annoying how this even needs to be a discussion.
School is there to teach math, language , science and literature. These other things shouldn't be taught in school and if they are, it should happen at much less impressionable ages?
Remember when they made us watch the sex video at the end of middleschool? How did we go from that to teaching kids about sex xhanges at 3 years old? It's fuckin weird and needs to be stopped if school is going to stay public.
People are pissed, they're taking their kids out of school. It's going to change how society works in a big way if this continues.
Sure parents should know about their kids and whats going on in school, but sometimes its best to disclose some information or at least the kids should have the right to prevent some information being told to the parents, espacially when they fear their parents may use violence on them, in this case social workers and police are informed and see into the family wether the kids are endangered.
And whenever the questions about gender/sexual orientation come up, its best to simply answer them.
At any rate, I love this bill. Though I wish it had gone farther than just third grade. a And quite frankly, the idea that we are now having to legally defend the rights of parents is I think a very disturbing indication of the direction our society is going.
i agree with those laws. i don't want my children to be indoctrinated with bullshit and confused about gender and sex in the middle of their own sexual development... i used to agree with general sexual education but now that they're trying to force lgbtq totalitarianism on our children, i disagree with that.
i think there is a legitimate space for teachers being granted secrecy rights from a childs parents but only in cases where they help with cases of domestic abuse...
@Losalt well, school isn't really the best place for learning about non-school topics. at least with the parents teaching their children there is a higher chance that the kids will get the information that they will need.
@Losalt do you think it's ok to teach 6 year old children that it's perfectly fine to swap out your private body parts? school should strictly be limited to English, electives, mathematics, science, history, and any other required subjects that provide education. only a counselor should be available for children to complain if they're being abused either in school or at home, that's about it.
@Losalt i do agree, however these topics should not be allowed for children under 16. and it should be optional for the parents to choose whether or not they're fine with their children taking such courses, and during such courses multiple views should be brought up so that the child by themselves can decide which side they want to take, rather than have false information being fed to them.
We have sex ed for kids that age and up. I don't have any examples in English from that age bracket, but I can find you a link to one for 8-12 year olds with English subtitles available through YouTubes automatic translations if you want. It's understandable and viewed by 5-8 year olds too although it wasn't originally intended for them.
@Losalt sex-ed is fine if they're just teaching about STDs, but even that should be a highschool only course and the parents should be allowed to withdraw their children if that's what they're more comfortable with. anything past STDs shouldn't be taught, and ONLY for highschoolers.
Well, I dissagree with you there, for me it's important that children learn about all the different ways people live, think and experience the world, that isn't about encouraging or discouraging anything, just about understanding and empathizing with people who live lives different from themselves. Understanding their point of view and learning how to respectfully disagree with someone.
Yes, and they do here. With your permission I'd like to send you a link in a private message to a series of videos that was broadcasted by the Norwegian state broadcasting service in a science program intended for 8-12 year olds (but with viewers above and below that age bracket too) in the prime time during the evening about sex ed, with a focus on understanding puberty.
We also have videos about consent, abuse, religions, etc, etc, etc. As well as dedicated news programs for children, political debates for children etc, etc.
@Losalt a 6 year old barely can even write its own name and count to 100... and you already want them to learn about sex? that's just perverted, if anything.
Instead it's important to teach them how to protect themselves, how the world works etc in a language they can understand. They need their questions answered just as much as we do.
Giving them the information needed to talk about this allows them to contact an adult if something bad *actually* happens to them and to express it when someone is doing something bad to them.
@Losalt i agree, but it's retarded to teach them this at 6. why do you think the age of consent is 18? it's because anyone who's younger than that still can't truly think for themselves yet. that's just straight up grooming if you're teaching them sexual topics at an age that's 3 times younger than the age of consent lmfao.
Being able to write or count doesn't define what they can or can't understand, both of those ideas are highly abstract and difficult to learn. You can still teach them concrete information that may help them in their lives.
@Losalt if counting and writing is still difficult for them, then do you really think it's appropriate for a child to learn about sex? writing and counting is a LOT easier than the concept of sex. this shouldn't even be a question. child grooming is not something that should be embraced.
@Irina 18 is only in your state, in my country it's 16, in the neighbouring countries it's 15, in the country where I'm technically a citizen it was 13 till 2017. Now it's 15.
You can still teach children about the difference between a boy and a girl, and about how if you feel uncomfortable with someone touching you on some way you need to talk with an adult, about how some areas are private, about how we change as we get older etc.
@Losalt did you not have a childhood? if you taught children about the main differences between girls and boys they'd want to check out each others "differences". they don't know any better.
@Irina The reason for those differences is among other things that unlike the US Iceland doesn't differentiate between someone below the age of consent having sex with someone else below that age and some adult doing so. A 14 year old having sex with another 14 year old would in other words be committing rape even if both are consenting. That's why the law used to include 13 and 14 year olds as being allowed to consent. However Europe as a whole is starting to gather around the age of 15 as the age of consent. (That does *not* mean that you should ever feel pressured into having sex even after the age of consent, it's normal here to debute at 18 despite our age of consent being 16).
@Irena Yeah, me and a girl did when we where 6. I think that's healthy, we got it out of our system. I don't even remember it anymore, just my mum talking about me talking about it. Apparently it was a non-issue after that.
Alright, believe whatever you like, but I find it weird that you think you are too young to learn sex ed because you think your age bracket can't make informed decisions, but you're old enough to think that you can have a informed decision about it being bad to being with...
@Irena Of *course* we didn't have sex... -_- Good grief. We where 6... Just looking at each other, learning etc. It was about as sexual as holding a Lego in your hand... -_-
@Irina You have much to learn... Biology is much more complicated then you think. There's women with y chromosomes, people born with both sets of genitals, and much more on top. Also, thinking *differently* does not equate to a mental illness.
But yeah, good night. And please read more up on the topic...
@Losalt yes, i do know enough on that topic that i understand how some of it works. and either way having an extra chromosome is something incredibly rare. most of the people are just "changing their gender" even with their 2 perfectly normal chromosomes.
@Losalt If you can respect other people’s opinions I would hope you could respect that some of us think teaching a seven year old about ass sex is a bridge too far. Crazy I know, but some of us don’t think that learning about chicks with dicks is part of sexual growth and development.
@Agagagagaga Fine, then use the *natural* compromise, give parents notice and let them opt their kid out if they wish, instead of banning *all* kids and *all* schools from teaching something, *including* those teaching exclusively non-American students.
Also, why the heck is anyone calling this "grooming" when it's the exact *opposite* teaching kids how to protect themselves. And unlike guns (and shooter drills) you'll find people doing harmful sexual things everywhere and kids *should* learn about it. Also, how can you claim to be free when you're intentionally keeping people away from the information they need to make informed decisions in the US? Ban on teaching kids about science, including evolution. A public narrative about slavery ending centuries ago despite there being slaves in the US as late as WW2. A completely inadequate sex ed that's already stifled by conservative parents in the individual schools further being stifled by lawmakers, leading to increased abortion rates, increased teenager pregnancy rates and more rapes. If you teach people what the heck they're doing they're less likely to doing it wrong. Keeping them ignorant isn't going to stop them from doing stuff anyway.
@Agagagagaga As for that age, sure, you don't need to go into as much details then, nor should you, but kids still need to learn the overarching concepts. Consent, people being different and experiencing the world differently, what the private parts is, why they're changing as they grow up (much better then them being afraid of the changes), and so one and so forth.
I've talked with Americans who have had oral sex only for the guy to freak out after offloading on her breasts, thinking she'll get pregnant. Americans who hid their first menstruation, thinking something was wrong and being scared. Americans not knowing that they where being abused or that being touched it there wasn't normal nor okay against their will, an Asian (I thi, living with the same lack of information about trans people that Americans do) thinking there was something wrong with him growing up because they didn't feel like their gender, and not having anyone to talk with, in part because they didn't have any support system *in* the school. And so one and so forth...
@Agagagagaga Also, quite frankly, as it currently stands sexual minorities are experiencing violence and discrimination, being thrown out of stores for being gay or trans. Kicked, screamed at by strangers etc. Some basic education about the topic at a young age could prevent a lot of that violence.
@Losalt yeah, most people aren't exactly comfortable if they see a person with a mental illness just walking around the store. and either way, in most of the more advanced countries no one even hates on gays. trans is one thing, but most are fine with gay people.
@Irina Both being gay and trans is a part of the natural variability of behaviors that has *always* existed among humans. In prehistoric times these people often became shamans etc. It's natural for any species to have many different variations both physically and mentally. It's how evolution works. Some things like self sacrificing and selflessness developed this way, it didn't benefit the individual in question, but in a group, in a specific population it increased their survivability compared to groups where this trait didn't exist. So the group as a whole was selected for even if the individual was more likely to risk their life and die they might save relatives that might also have those genes. Gay people and trans people are most likely similar. And tend to be more creative individuals increasing the survival chance of the group as a whole by adding to its creativity etc. Even though the trait decreased the chance that the *individual* could reproduce, so groups with those genes where selected for. In some cultures, especially in Asia they're even considered a third gender. But either way, you can't just ignore it and pretend that it's not there. Or that it's a mental health problem, when it's clearly not. There's a lot of legacy diagnosises on the books that really isn't considered real diseases anymore but that's still there because of inertia.
@Irina As for gay people. Well a friend of mine was knocked out cold inside a grocery store for being gay...
And on a different note. Another friend of mine was white, but was disowned by his parents for having a black *friend*. Not boyfriend/girlfriend or being gay or whatever, but because he had a *friend* who was black. This is the kind of people who vote in the US, and sometimes they're the politicians making the laws. And because of the first past the post electoral system, the lack of proper education without intervention from the politicians and a US media (the TV channels) mostly being owned by wealthy individuals that favours one of the two major political parties the debate in the US ends up being extremely one dimensional lacking the nuances found many other places in the world. There *are* many other political parties and points of view then what the big two are voicing.
@Losalt lmao being trans was not something that ever existed. being gay was rare, but it did happen. but trans? no. that's just a new mental illness that society has adopted.
@Irina Sorry, but that's just not accurate. What's new is just that we've started overcoming the tendency of the abrahamic religions to persecute them for their nature. It has existed since prior to the invention of writing. Both of them have. It's not new at all. Trans people are just behind their gay brethren in their fight for recognition.
@Irina Look up the references to trans priests in Sumerian and Akaddian texts from about 4500 years ago for instance. Prior to that they where shamans etc, now in these early city states they became priests instead. Dressing in clothes of the opposite gender, and removing their genitals etc.
@Jixtapose Baning the secrecy is fine by me. Banning the topic entirely even when the parents (and other political parties) wants, no, that's just wrong.
@Irina I'm not talking about what was or wasn't happening on a given school, I've never heard about the story that probably motivated this whole thing. People learning about gender identity etc is a non-story here.
I'm discussing the *law* in isolation. You can ban whatever motivated this law without making a law that gets in the way of perfectly legitimate education that the kids needs. The law as stated above is just wrong. Ban secrecy about topics, sure. No problem there. Ban schools from teaching the kids about gender identity etc *against* the parents will, somewhat bigoted perhaps, but sure, just give parents a opt out option for that class or day and demand alternative classes for those who opt out. But banning the topic in its *entirety*, in the whole state for all children regardless of how harmless and we'll designed the education is even *with* parental consent, or even upon their or the students themselves own request, is just plain wrong.
Well, it just seems obvious to me that children in school should be able to speak in confidence with their teachers as some children are abused at home.
Who contacts the law enforcement? The third grader or the teacher?
Lets apply it to parents grooming their kids as well. Because their is a lot of that going on and that is very true when it comes to politics. Parents grooming their kids to push the same political and social agenda the parents have. Reducing their children to tools to be used to push an agenda. Be it a grade school aged child actively protesting with mom and dad or ambushing any given official with a group of kids at their office. Simply to get the parents political and social views across.
@anylolone If there is going to be ant-grooming bill it should cover as many types of grooming as it can. That includes people using their positions to groom children for political ends. Including their own parents. Because it really does not matter the reason why a person is grooming a kid. In the end a person grooms a kid so that the kid can server a purpose laid out by the person grooming them.
You mean rear, child rearing. Parents get to "politically and religiously" rear their kids, or as it's usually put by non-groomers, inculcate their values into their kids. Actually, they don't get to do that, technically it's their duty to do that, but it's a soft duty, like voting.
@anylolone No I don't mean that. I mean exactly what I'm saying. It does not matter what side of a given debate a parent is on, it's a adult issue. There for kids should be kept out of it. Dragging your kids into a adult issue and pushing your views onto them is grooming them. That is especially true when you bring them to protests or to ambush elected officials.
Actually, in this case, no. The job of the parent is to not keep out of it. You need to understand the concept of instrumental goal and essential goals. Parents give kids their essence, school gives instruments.
A lot of these teachers are experimenting on kids... getting off on the power of brainwashing. I'd haul half of these teachers off to prison. I'm sure I could find legit evidence of them doing pedo crap or plotting to.
Yes. They're very young and they'll learn more about gender identity and sexual orientation as they get older. It's not the school system's place to intervene.
26.5K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
If my kids were still in the system I would be one of those parents you see on the news being dragged out by the cops in handcuffs for voicing my opinion during a school committee meeting.
Child predators always tell kids to keep what they're doing to them a secret. I had no idea how prevalent this was until recently. I want criminal investigations into every school district in America.
Don’t talk to our kids about that they’re making them professional useless people cus they know that shit wouldn’t fly in middle or high school because those kids are too defiant but if they really wanted people to learn about it they’d make it a part of sex ed a class they don’t have in early education because they are fucking babies if they’re allowed to do that then they should be able to religion in school too God made them Man and Woman and BLESSED💯 THEIR❗️union. Let’s teach kids that
11.4K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
So if parents are as educated and know as much as teachers do and have taken all the requisite courses in good teaching there is no reason that they shouldn't be teachers. However if none of these things are true then parents dictating curriculum or teaching methods is complete stupidity. If parents still think they're experts than they ought to just do home teaching and forget about schools altogether. The truth is that most parents are no more qualified to be teachers than they are to be doctors or lawyers. They haven't gone to school for it and they don't know what the hell they're talking about.
No, it is not treated that way, but I think it should be. Scandinavian countries don't make a big deal out of sex, and their rate of sex crimes is far lower than ours in the US.
I also cannot strip naked and walk free in Scandinavian countries.
I think for adults you have a point but kids should be kids. They are talking about kids as young as 5 when I didn't learn about sex till I was about 12. There's no reason to be talking to someone in the single digit age range about sex.
lol yeah her parents are to blame there dude, not the school system. That's a pretty extreme example by the way and I can guarantee her family was raping her.
My mother is a primary teacher. She already found kids doing things to each other. More often than not it was because they got exposed to it somehow, via internet TV whatever and no one answered any questions they had about it. Kids did what they do best and went to find out by themselves.
I agree that actively teaching kids somethings in shcool that early is not the best idea. Teachers shouldn't talk about it and if a kid asks the teacher should shake off the question and then talk to the parents about the question the kid made, depending on how explicit the question was. Just to avoid some very uncomfortable scenarios.
Quite frankly this law seems crazy to me. Knowing what your kids learn in school, sure, absolutely. But banning teachers from teaching them things they *need* to know? That's a different matter.
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions