• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

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.
 
SmCaudata said:
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.
Click to expand...
I'm sure Peterson will be along any second to denounce this.
 
SmCaudata said:
Isn't this a direct first amendment issue?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Jaskalas said:
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.
Click to expand...
Not sure about 1A but I'm sure there are many other issue because blacks and gay people are singled out for scrutiny.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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)
Click to expand...

"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...)
Click to expand...

"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)
Click to expand...

"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.)
Click to expand...

"What makes our country unique" - (Meaning We are Unique in that we white christians are what makes this country great)
Click to expand...

All those basic thing- (Because if we go beyond basic then we end having to teach things that my supporters don't understand)
Click to expand...


Technology today
So fun
So fab
 
Jaskalas said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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”
Click to expand...

 
pete6032 said:
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.



Click to expand...
You act like this radical supreme court gives two shits about precedence.
 
Jaskalas said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
simpletron said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
fskimospy said:
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.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he is going at it fucking hard.
 
fskimospy said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
SMOGZINN said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top