It’s a shame what has become of the Washington Post.
Opinion: Ron DeSantis’s repulsive war on Disney will soon face a reckoning
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
They had an opportunity to change the wording of the law to make it more general, but the Republicans voted against it.
The amendment proposed by Sen. Jeff Brandes, a Republican representing St. Petersburg, would've replaced the words "sexual orientation or gender identity" with "human sexuality or sexual activity."
This would mean that instruction about sexual activity, in general, would be banned for certain grade levels. Supporters of the amendment, including Equality Florida, said it was a step in the right direction, as debate over the bill has often conflated sexual orientation and sexual activity.
"If the intent of this bill isn’t to marginalize anyone, let’s make sure we aren’t," Brandes said during Monday's Senate Appropriations Committee.
The amendment failed on a party-line vote, with Brandes being the lone Republican to vote in support.
Amendment to shift focus of 'parental rights' bill away from sexual orientation fails
The amendment would've replaced the words "sexual orientation or gender identity" with "human sexuality or sexual activity."
www.wtsp.com
PDF of amendment:
They had an opportunity to change the wording of the law to make it more general, but the Republicans voted against it.
The amendment proposed by Sen. Jeff Brandes, a Republican representing St. Petersburg, would've replaced the words "sexual orientation or gender identity" with "human sexuality or sexual activity."
This would mean that instruction about sexual activity, in general, would be banned for certain grade levels. Supporters of the amendment, including Equality Florida, said it was a step in the right direction, as debate over the bill has often conflated sexual orientation and sexual activity.
"If the intent of this bill isn’t to marginalize anyone, let’s make sure we aren’t," Brandes said during Monday's Senate Appropriations Committee.
The amendment failed on a party-line vote, with Brandes being the lone Republican to vote in support.
Amendment to shift focus of 'parental rights' bill away from sexual orientation fails
The amendment would've replaced the words "sexual orientation or gender identity" with "human sexuality or sexual activity."
PDF of amendment:
Yeah I saw that. They know exactly what they are doing but like to act innocent. It doesn't say gay though. They got us there.
Uh, could you tell that to the people who gave the law the cute (inaccurate) misleading nickname?
Should they call it the "Don't say sexual orientation" bill?
Maybe call it the actual name of the bill if you want to be taken seriously.
I understand that won’t get as many likes on Facebook and Twitter, but oh well.
LOL ok. They did attempt to discuss the specific content that targets gay.. I mean sexual orientation.. but it was decided to keep the specific language in place. I wonder why? Funny how the defenders seem to use language like "sex talk doesn't belong in K-3 class" but the bill doesn't say anything about banning sex talk.
If you have 3rd grade teenagers, Florida education must be pretty f@#ked up.
You mentioned (again) that the word gay is not in the bill. The words "sexual orientation" are in the bill. What does sexual orientation refer to?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florida was a different world in 1967 - Dems firmly in control of the Legislature and every local government. They were thrilled beyond belief that Walt Disney wanted to build a park literally in the middle of nowhere (at the time).
I do wonder if that deal could get through now. The Reedy Creek District created an ability to be a self governing body for Disney. It granted them unprecedented rights - airport? No problem. A nuclear power plant? Sure!
Disney has suspended all political contributions by the way. It’s their right.
The pushback is hysteria created largely by a group of mostly California park employees by the way. We’re still waiting for researchers to look at the tiniest fine print to find the word “gay” in the bill, which the Governor didn’t write OR request to be written. But since he’s such a fearsome prospect for ‘24 he must be destroyed!!!
Facts and truth be damned! Ignorance must continue! Kindergarten kids must be taught all about sexuality!
Last edited:
What part of the bill restricts all conversations about sex? I see where they restrict discussion on sexual orientation and gender identity and that they rejected a proposal to broaden the language to any sexual topics.
Bulleted synopsis of the bill is shown below. Somebody please correct any details I get wrong. I want to make sure we understand the facts/truth to this as there seems to be a lot of disinformation and confusion out there. I added the common interpretations to the bolded sections in parentheses.
The proponents seem to focus on everything except the bolded parts. "This just gives parents more control and keeps them informed". They seem to interpret the no discussion on sexual orientation or gender identity as banning "sex talk" for grades K-3, which is clearly not the wording. Opponents say the bill focuses on gay/trans and the wording is left purposely vague.
The proponents seem to focus on everything except the bolded parts. "This just gives parents more control and keeps them informed". They seem to interpret the no discussion on sexual orientation or gender identity as banning "sex talk" for grades K-3, which is clearly not the wording. Opponents say the bill focuses on gay/trans and the wording is left purposely vague.
- Notify parents if there is a change in student's services or monitoring related to student's mental, emotional, or physical health
- School district personnel are required to discuss student well being issues with parent (out gay/trans student to parents)
- Schools may not use forms or other processes to circumvent the above or otherwise discourage the student from notifying parents unless in cases of abuse, abandonment, or neglect
- Parents may not be restricted from accessing any school records for their children
- Don't discuss sexual orientation or gender identity in grades K-3 or in a manner that is not age or developmentally appropriate (don't say gay or trans in K-3)
- Student support services must follow guidelines/standards established by DOE
- Schools must notify parents at beginning of school year on all healthcare services offered at their schools with option to withhold consent or decline any specific service
- Health questionnaires must be provided to parent and parents need to approve before the questionnaire is given to student
- School districts to adopt procedures for parent to notify principal or designee regarding concerns and a process for addressing concerns
I thought the outing students part of the bill was withdrawn. I think the language says that the school can not prohibit an educator from sharing a student's orientation/gender idenity, but I don't believe they are required to report it to the parents. I may be wrong though.
I underlined the part that was added in amendment 1 which I see as giving schools the right to withhold the information if it could be harmful to the child.
2. A school district may not adopt procedures or student support forms that prohibit school district personnel from notifying a parent about his or her student's mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being, or a change in related services or monitoring, or that encourage or have the effect of encouraging a student to withhold from a parent such information. School district personnel may not discourage or prohibit parental notification of and involvement in critical decisions affecting a student's mental, emotional, or physical 16 health or well-being. This subparagraph does not prohibit a school district from adopting procedures that permit school personnel to withhold such information from a parent if a reasonably prudent person would believe that disclosure would result in abuse, abandonment, or neglect, as those terms are defined in s. 39.01
Either way I agree with you this law has one purpose that is to target the LGBTQ community and fire up the base about something that isn't a problem.
Yes, DeSantis is a full on Fasisct pos and needs to be defeated.
Do you think the reckoning will happen before Thursday (of 2020)...when Gaetz gets arrested?
Disney should drop Florida resident pricing.
Disney should stop donating to the GOP and fund the Democrats to get these Fascist delusional cultists out of office as well.
The republicans will conquer disney, don't worry. America will be safe once again.
I know disney won’t pack up and leave but i wish this would backfire on the political grandstanding by desantis.
unfortunately it won’t
unfortunately it won’t
When are they going to go after the commies on Sesame Street?
Police found DeSantis's bare-recognizable body covered with mouse bites.
Disney getting their own special self governing charter seems like something Dems would be against and Repubs would be for. Because usually Dems don't want a businesses to operate where they have that much power to make their own rules and regulations. Whereas Repubs are generally for it thinking the Private sector is better at it than the government.
But seems they have reversed roles because of politics. Petty Petty Petty!
But seems they have reversed roles because of politics. Petty Petty Petty!
The Florida Democratic Party are among the most incompetent in the nation. A fact made even harder by the years of gerrymandering in the state. But if they suddenly got an influx of millions of dollars from Disney? That might change some things. But it would take a lot.
This is literally the Democratic Party's modus operandi. Any means necessary.
When Walt Disney asked the State to create the Reedy Creek District the Legislature was completely controlled by Democrats. The first Republican Governor since Reconstruction had just recently been elected.
When Walt asked for control of hundreds of thousands of acres of scrub pine, palmettos and swamp land those guys thought it was just sitting there so why not?
Gerrymandering the State of Florida? Say it ain’t so! The 5th District was gerrymandered just so a minority candidate could stay in office. Al Lawson, from Tallahassee, now represents minority areas on Jacksonville’s west side - 170 miles east. Lawson is a good man but he’s a long time Tallahasseean and there have been complaints that he isn’t always responsive to his constituents in Jax. So the two new districts are now just over 50% lean Republican. I think Lawson’s favorability ratings give him a good shot at retaining his seat. I personally like the man. I’m not in either of the new districts or I might vote for him.
Yup. This after the people of Florida voted for an amendment to the constitution (if I am remembering that correctly) to prevent exactly that. From what I can tell, the legislature just decided to ignore that vote, pretend it doesn't exist, and then carry on business as usual. And, of course there have been no repercussions for this.
I am talking in generalities as it exists in the current parties philosophies. I don't think Desantis would be pushing for this if it wasn't for Disney taking public stances in the political arena against bills he signed and against other policies he was for.
By the same token, if it wasn't DeSantis pushing for this and Disney leaned more right, Dems would be all for it.
Wait, for at least 2 years you've know Tom was a great teacher and you still won't acknowledge it?
Similar threads
