[jdulej]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Yes, long overdue. The indoctrination of our youth started 30-40 years ago in our universities and has now filtered down to the grade school level. Finally a state government got fed up and said enough is enough

Well, I guess one persons "indoctrination of our youth" is another persons "let's stop brainwashing them and just teach the truth".

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by jdulej

Well, I guess one persons "indoctrination of our youth" is another persons "let's stop brainwashing them and just teach the truth".

So, you think that college professors spouting out socialism and communism and woke cr@p is "teaching the truth"???? Even back in 1976 in an organic chemistry class, the professor spent more time on the Ford-Carter election, "free" healthcare, "free" college tuition, "free" nursing homes and espousing the virtues of Swedish socialism than he did teaching chemistry. Nowadays, mom and dad have to spend $50,000+/year for their kids to be forced to listen to that.

[rustyp]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

I heard on the radio that Florida may abolish special districts. Apparently Disney is a special district.

As a newcomer, I am still confused by the political districts in Florida. Would that impact us?

For those who believe it could never happen in TV the lead story in the forbidden online news this AM is "The Villages District Office issues statement indicating it’s not part of DeSantis’ aim at Disney".

First time since in my 15 years in TV have I seen the developer take a stance not on the same page as the republican party. Obviously some concern to prompt this maneuver.

[jdulej]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

So, you think that college professors spouting out socialism and communism and woke cr@p is "teaching the truth"???? Even back in 1976 in an organic chemistry class, the professor spent more time on the Ford-Carter election, "free" healthcare, "free" college tuition, "free" nursing homes and espousing the virtues of Swedish socialism than he did teaching chemistry. Nowadays, mom and dad have to spend $50,000+/year for their kids to be forced to listen to that.

Sure, had a few profs like that - we just laughed at them behind their backs. We certainly were not "indoctrinated" other than learning that the tenure process had good and bad sides. Unfortunately, those classes usually ended up a waste of time.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Once again, I don't know of anyone who accused Disney of "grooming" their guests. Fantasize much????

And if, as you stated, "there is no sexual orientation taught in public schools in K-5", then the parent's rights law is irrelevant, so why all the LGBQTXYZ and "woke" protests??????

Because the reality of how the law is written and how it is likely to be used is far different from the marketing that was used to sell it to the public. While the word "gay" does not appear in the bill, neither does the word "anti-grooming." The vague wording of the bill makes it frightening to those who have reason to believe it will be used against them.

Interestingly, the vague wording of the bill also opens the possibility of it being used against those who championed it. The law doesn't say gay and it doesn't say trans, the law says sexual orientation. If we can't discuss Sally's two dads because that is grooming or indoctrination or teaching of sexual orientation then how can we discuss Bambi's mother and father, is that not also teaching a sexual orientation?

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by jdulej

Sure, had a few profs like that - we just laughed at them behind their backs. We certainly were not "indoctrinated" other than learning that the tenure process had good and bad sides. Unfortunately, those classes usually ended up a waste of time.

See, we can agree on something

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

So, you think that college professors spouting out socialism and communism and woke cr@p is "teaching the truth"???? Even back in 1976 in an organic chemistry class, the professor spent more time on the Ford-Carter election, "free" healthcare, "free" college tuition, "free" nursing homes and espousing the virtues of Swedish socialism than he did teaching chemistry. Nowadays, mom and dad have to spend $50,000+/year for their kids to be forced to listen to that.

30-40 years ago I was in college but I sure don't remember my "professors spouting out socialism and communism and woke cr@p." Different degree, different university, different experience I guess.

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

So, you think that college professors spouting out socialism and communism and woke cr@p is "teaching the truth"???? Even back in 1976 in an organic chemistry class, the professor spent more time on the Ford-Carter election, "free" healthcare, "free" college tuition, "free" nursing homes and espousing the virtues of Swedish socialism than he did teaching chemistry. Nowadays, mom and dad have to spend $50,000+/year for their kids to be forced to listen to that.

Back in 1976 a professor rambled on about an election, no doubt for the candidate you weren't.

And that proves something 44 years later?

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Because the reality of how the law is written and how it is likely to be used is far different from the marketing that was used to sell it to the public. While the word "gay" does not appear in the bill, neither does the word "anti-grooming." The vague wording of the bill makes it frightening to those who have reason to believe it will be used against them.

Interestingly, the vague wording of the bill also opens the possibility of it being used against those who championed it. The law doesn't say gay and it doesn't say trans, the law says sexual orientation. If we can't discuss Sally's two dads because that is grooming or indoctrination or teaching of sexual orientation then how can we discuss Bambi's mother and father, is that not also teaching a sexual orientation?

Agreed, that is why the law (passed, no longer a bill) states sexual orientation, not specifically targeting ANY ONE sexual orientation. I don't want my 5 year old grandchild getting taught what mommy and daddy do in their bedroom any more than being taught how two men "express their love"

As far as certain groups being "afraid" the law will be used against them----get over it, a lot of things in this world are frightening. And if it actually gets used in that way, there is legal recourse

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

Back in 1976 a professor rambled on about an election, no doubt for the candidate you weren't.

And that proves something 44 years later?

Yes it does, and it's so obvious I need not explain it.

BTW, I favored Jimmy---something I very much regretted 3 years later

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

Good post,

But it won't do any good. Many have made up their minds that by being against "don't say gay" Disney is promoting pedophilia and grooming. At least that is what the right wing news and radical politicians are saying. They don't every ask any questions, if instructed to hate liberals on an issue they dutifully follow orders.

When CRT came up it was first promoted by a religious zealot on Fox as being taught in K-5, mentioning several states. News reporters thought that would be BIG story if true, so they looked, and it wasn't being taught ANYWHERE. It is a college level optional course. So, they have to find things like, heaven forbid, school books with a black child and a white child playing together and call that CRT. CRT is a straw man that the GOP is using to keep their base mad at liberals.

CRT flopped, so, they looked for something else, and Along came a Judge who they claimed gave lenient sentences to pedophiles - except her sentencing was completely in line with guidelines and no different than judges appointed by Trump. But, that didn't slow down the attacks. Over and over they yelled and screamed their anger over pedophiles being loved by a judge. MTG summed it up well, liberals are pedophiles or pedophile supporters.

Well then it must be true. And since Disney was against a law that targets gay, then Disney is a sicko company grooming children. Except, once again, there is NO evidence of grooming, there is no sexual orientation taught in public schools in K-5. Disney has over 58 million guests each year (down for the last two years - can't imagine why) and in the past 10 years, 500 MILLION guests. And no one has complained about grooming, sexual inappropriate, etc, NONE. In fact, just the opposite parents rave about how wonderful the place is to take children. But, you know, Fox said Disney is a sicko company and SUDDENLY the same people that a few weeks ago were dreaming of taking their grad children to Disney are now hating it.

Just pay attention to how often THEY say that K-5 shouldn't teach sex or sexual orientation. But, then think, WHO is saying they do? Where is the evidence? Why are those teachers not being arrested and charged with child abuse? Yet, they aren't and there isn't. As someone earlier in this thread so elegantly put it:

BS

Tell me you never read the bill without telling me you never read the bill...


P.S. Check out "Libs of TicTock. There are multiple videos (put out by pre-school and K-3 teachers) who are bragging about doing EXACTLY what you're saying they're not doing...

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by rustyp

For those who believe it could never happen in TV the lead story in the forbidden online news this AM is "The Villages District Office issues statement indicating it’s not part of DeSantis’ aim at Disney".

First time since in my 15 years in TV have I seen the developer take a stance not on the same page as the republican party. Obviously some concern to prompt this maneuver.

I don't see it as taking a stand but stating facts.
The birth of a new conspiracy theory from you?

[jimbomaybe]

Originally Posted by jdulej

Well, I guess one persons "indoctrination of our youth" is another persons "let's stop brainwashing them and just teach the truth".

And what pray tell is that "truth"?

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Agreed, that is why the law (passed, no longer a bill) states sexual orientation, not specifically targeting ANY ONE sexual orientation. I don't want my 5 year old grandchild getting taught what mommy and daddy do in their bedroom any more than being taught how two men "express their love"

As far as certain groups being "afraid" the law will be used against them----get over it, a lot of things in this world are frightening. And if it actually gets used in that way, there is legal recourse

So, you are okay with a teacher being sued by a parent for mentioning she was going bowling with her HUSBAND after class? Because that is exactly what people are afraid of if the same teacher said she was going bowling with HER WIFE.

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by jimbomaybe

And what pray tell is that "truth"?

Easy question, in most people "truth" is what they believe. And the older one gets the more certain they are that their TRUTH is the true truth. So, here most people are very convinced.