Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signals support for 'Don't Say Gay' bill

SmCaudata

Senior member
Oct 8, 2006
969
1,530
136
Isn't this a direct first amendment issue? Government censoring speech with consequences. Has anyone in the GOP actually read the constitution? Or do they just like using it for toilet paper?

It would make more sense to have age appropriate conversations about this. There are elementary level books. By not addressing it some kids are likely teased and feeling like outsiders.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
32,902
22,815
136
Isn't this a direct first amendment issue? Government censoring speech with consequences. Has anyone in the GOP actually read the constitution? Or do they just like using it for toilet paper?

It would make more sense to have age appropriate conversations about this. There are elementary level books. By not addressing it some kids are likely teased and feeling like outsiders.
I'm sure Peterson will be along any second to denounce this.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
31,485
5,286
126
Isn't this a direct first amendment issue?
Do you know what the bill is?
Because specifying school standards and instruction is probably not a first amendment issue. Though I would be interested if it could be argued as such before a Court.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
31,133
19,397
136
Do you know what the bill is?
Because specifying school standards and instruction is probably not a first amendment issue. Though I would be interested if it could be argued as such before a Court.
Not sure about 1A but I'm sure there are many other issue because blacks and gay people are singled out for scrutiny.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

pauldun170

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2011
8,919
4,667
136
They need to teach them science, history. We need more civics and understanding of the US Constitution, what makes our country unique, all those basic things.
I ran this quote through the context generator and this is what it produced


"They need to teach them science" (Just kidding. When we say science, we only mean the stuff in the children's section like that cute Newton and the apple story. Otherwise we mean these lessons out of the "Teach the controversy" manual)
"They need to teach them history" - (Lol...we mean just the part that reminds whites and Christians of that fairy tales we learned as kids. Like US single handedly defeating the Nazi's, the settlers shared food with Indians and Paul Revere and shit...)
"We need more civics" - (Each child should be able to identify the personal catchphrase of Washington, Lincoln and the every Republican President from Nixon on. That and the textbook definition of Court, Legislative and Executive from wikipedia)
"understanding of the US Constitution" - (We need to teach kids that saying the phrase "Read the Constitution" over and over again is Step 1 and that they should know that the only amendment that matters is the 2nd amendment.)
"What makes our country unique" - (Meaning We are Unique in that we white christians are what makes this country great)
All those basic thing- (Because if we go beyond basic then we end having to teach things that my supporters don't understand)

Technology today
So fun
So fab
 

SmCaudata

Senior member
Oct 8, 2006
969
1,530
136
Do you know what the bill is?
Because specifying school standards and instruction is probably not a first amendment issue. Though I would be interested if it could be argued as such before a Court.
I haven't read the bill, but preventing teachers from discussing something with students appears to be suppression of speach. If it specifically targets curriculum I guess that's a different issue, but if they are gagged in general, I think it's problematic no?

As I said, if a student in the class is being targeted, the teacher needs to be able to address it. This likely would involve talking to both the victim and the bullies about sexual orientatiin/identification in some way. The media coverage of this bill seems to indicate that wouldn't be allowed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaskalas

pete6032

Diamond Member
Dec 3, 2010
6,494
2,111
136
This is not exactly the same scenario but very related where the Supreme Court stated that students have a right to receive information as receiving information is a "meaningful exercise" of free speech. One could argue that limiting the discussions teachers have with students is similar to removing books from a library and therefore hindering the students' free speech.

In Board of Education v. Pico a school board attempted to remove books from a school library. The school board’s action did not restrict minors’ own expression, but the Supreme Court rejected the removal because “the right to receive ideas is a necessary predicate to the recipient’s meaningful exercise of his own rights of speech, press, and political freedom”
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
12,331
7,255
136
This is not exactly the same scenario but very related where the Supreme Court stated that students have a right to receive information as receiving information is a "meaningful exercise" of free speech. One could argue that limiting the discussions teachers have with students is similar to removing books from a library and therefore hindering the students' free speech.



You act like this radical supreme court gives two shits about precedence.
 

simpletron

Member
Oct 31, 2008
189
14
81
Do you know what the bill is?
Because specifying school standards and instruction is probably not a first amendment issue. Though I would be interested if it could be argued as such before a Court.
The bills are HB 1557 and SB 1834. here is a link to HB 1557 https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/c1/
and the text is below:

3. A school district may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.

4. A parent of a student may bring an action against a school district to obtain a declaratory judgment that a school district procedure or practice violates this paragraph and seek injunctive relief. A court may award damages and shall award reasonable attorney fees and court costs to a parent who receives declaratory or injunctive relief.

It basically setting up teachers/districts to get sued. A kid ask a question about something gay. The teacher answers the gay question in the classroom. A different kid tells their parents about there day at school and the parents think that isn't "age-appropriate" and sues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dainthomas

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
77,057
33,860
136
The bills are HB 1557 and SB 1834. here is a link to HB 1557 https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/c1/
and the text is below:

3. A school district may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.

4. A parent of a student may bring an action against a school district to obtain a declaratory judgment that a school district procedure or practice violates this paragraph and seek injunctive relief. A court may award damages and shall award reasonable attorney fees and court costs to a parent who receives declaratory or injunctive relief.

It basically setting up teachers/districts to get sued. A kid ask a question about something gay. The teacher answers the gay question in the classroom. A different kid tells their parents about there day at school and the parents think that isn't "age-appropriate" and sues.
It's taking the Texas anti-abortion law and applying it to education. Since if a teacher says one wrong thing they can now be subject to ruinous litigation this will have the effect of teachers refusing to talk about anything even close to it. The Supreme Court's decision not to immediately strike down this flagrantly lawless bounty provision is causing it to spread all over the country.

As for DeSantis though, you should expect this for the next several years - he will eagerly hop in to any culture war issue he sees because that's his plan to beat Trump if Trump runs, outflank him on the right.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
54,858
7,612
126
It's taking the Texas anti-abortion law and applying it to education. Since if a teacher says one wrong thing they can now be subject to ruinous litigation this will have the effect of teachers refusing to talk about anything even close to it. The Supreme Court's decision not to immediately strike down this flagrantly lawless bounty provision is causing it to spread all over the country.

As for DeSantis though, you should expect this for the next several years - he will eagerly hop in to any culture war issue he sees because that's his plan to beat Trump if Trump runs, outflank him on the right.
Yeah, he is going at it fucking hard.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
13,717
3,657
136
It's taking the Texas anti-abortion law and applying it to education. Since if a teacher says one wrong thing they can now be subject to ruinous litigation this will have the effect of teachers refusing to talk about anything even close to it. The Supreme Court's decision not to immediately strike down this flagrantly lawless bounty provision is causing it to spread all over the country.
Yes, and SCOTUS has no intention of striking down that law until it is applied to something they don't like. California needs to use it to ban guns immediately.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
77,057
33,860
136
Yes, and SCOTUS has no intention of striking down that law until it is applied to something they don't like. California needs to use it to ban guns immediately.
I suspect when they end up ruling on the abortion bill and gutting Roe v. Wade they will strike down the bounty provision as well because it is truly an invitation to absolute chaos. In fact the cynic in me says they are holding it for that purpose specifically so that they can claim some sort of 'balanced' ruling.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY