ABC News Doesn't Want You To Know DeSantis Is Protecting 5-Year-Olds
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Despite the corrupt media's best efforts to derail Florida's Parental Rights in Education bill by dishonestly framing it as "Don't Say Gay," Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the bill into law on Monday to the benefit of families across the state.
The media didn't stand down, of course. Not only did they continue to give the impression that under the new law, the word "gay" is off-limits, but they declined to mention whom the new law is intended to protect. That's because don't want you to know it's for five-year-olds.
"BREAKING: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signs controversial 'Don't Say Gay' bill into law," ABC News tweeted Monday afternoon with a clip of the signing ceremony. "The bill bans lessons on sexual orientation or gender identity in some grades."
"Some grades," huh? Ignoring for a moment ABC's continued invocation of "don't say gay" (and the fact that the bill is really only "controversial" insofar as the media have been lying about it), you might be left wondering what those "some grades" are if you haven't yet read the now-law.
Wonder no more. Here's the relevant portion of the simple and straightforward legislation:
Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.
By "some grades," ABC News meant kindergarteners through third-graders. In other words, the law is meant to protect 8-year-olds down to five- and perhaps even four-year-olds, as well as their parents by permitting the latter to decide if and when they broach sensitive sex topics with their young children. Older classes can still discuss historical events like Stonewall and health topics like sexually transmitted diseases when they're "age-appropriate."
ABC News' verbiage is no accident. By framing a very narrow age group as "some grades" — something that could just as easily be referring to kids at prom — ABC intentionally diverts attention from the fact that the kids in danger of prematurely learning about "tucking" and "binding" and gay sex are children who still have all their baby teeth and wear pull-ups to sleep. They're kids who can't get up from the dinner table until they eat five more bites of peas and who are tucked into bed and sound asleep by 8 p.m. They haven't the faintest notions of puberty and no idea how mommy gets a baby in her belly.
But saying, "The bill bans lessons on sexual orientation or gender identity for 5-year-olds who still wet the bed and check for monsters under it," doesn't serve the media's anti-parent and pro-LGBT-all-the-time function the way "some grades" and "don't say gay" do. So the public is served with left-wing media spin.
Florida's Parental Rights in Education legislation doesn't prevent "some grades" from "saying gay." It prevents kindergarteners from consuming pornographic picture books at school and five-year-olds from being encouraged in the classroom to consider pronouns that don't correspond with reality. More than that, it does exactly what the real name of the bill says: It preserves parents' rights in the education of their own children.
Kylee Zempel is an assistant editor at The Federalist. She previously worked as the copy editor for the Washington Examiner magazine and as an editor and producer at National Geographic. She holds a B.S. in Communication Arts/Speech and an A.S. in Criminal Justice and writes on topics including feminism and gender issues, religious liberty, and criminal justice. Follow her on Twitter @kyleezempel.
Tags
Who is online
424 visitors
Gee...I think he's winning the culture war....the one we thought we lost so long ago.
Golly gee ... culture wars are won by the next up generation and more often than not it's a good thing. The young De Santis and the middle-aged De Santis have already parted ways. His fans will see it as growing wisdom, his detractors as shrinking empathy. If he has one thing on his side, it is time, but then time is a Jokester that often hardens the soul and the dragon slayer becomes the dragon.
So you're saying it's OK to indoctrinate little kids about gay sex and transgenderism, when they're too young to even understand it?
I think kids are smarter than you think and quite likely you are too old to know that.
That seemed to be the consensus coming from conservatives on a different recent seed as they defended and deflected for a teacher that "told kids they should avoid sex before marriage because the Bible said so, that students needed to believe in God, that God would help them "make better decisions" about how to handle their hormones, etc.".
I opted for being both, so far the result has been outstanding.
But none of yours are snots right?
They all believe she was outstanding as a kid and is outstanding as an adult. Not to worry, you can fantasize that they all lied to me.
"So they say ?
You know how "FRIENDS" are ..... They don't want to "Hurt" your "FEELINGS" most times, to keep you as a Friend.... snicker"
Both of these quotes from you should also apply to you by your own measure.
So, how your friends say they view your children shouldn't be taken seriously either because "You know how 'FRIENDS' are....They don't want to 'Hurt' your 'FEELINGS' most of the time to keep you as a Friend....snicker." You destroyed whatever point you were trying to make with both of those quotes.
Wrong. You destroyed your own point.
In your own words.
SURE THEY DO !
Some of us have all the friends we need or want - how about you?
So true and he pretends not to see that.
No, YOU destroyed YOUR OWN POINT In YOUR OWN WORDS
I quoted your own words back to you, and you're still arguing about what YOU said. Geez.
You obviously don't understand how forums like this work.
Whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean
I will say whatever the fuck I please to whoever the fuck I please.
I quoted your own words, so what's good for the goose...you know the rest.
I was a parent to my kids when they were growing up. I became a friend only after they became adults. I have done the same with two out of four grandkids so far as well and have great relationships with them today.
Yes, I did and you destroyed your own point with your own comments. The end.
nicely done
There is no difference just because you say so. Your friends would have had to tell (i.e., say to) you they "love" watching your kids so....no difference at all.
There's your answer in your own words as to why they maybe don't say no.
I already addressed that part of the conversation. Your friends would have had to tell you ("SO THEY SAY" TO YOU) that they "love" watching your kids.
So we go back to this quote as to why friends wouldn't say no to watching your kids. You can go around in circles all day on what YOU SAID, but it doesn't change the fact that your own quotes negate any point you were trying to make.
You really don't know what your point was!!! Did you talk yourself in such a circle you don't know what you were saying anymore? Wow.
You: So they say ?
You: You know how "FRIENDS" are ..... They don't want to "Hurt" your "FEELINGS" most times, to keep you as a Friend.... snicker.
Then you again: Friends love watching my KIDS when we need a bit of help for a few hours.
Your point was you don't believe Hallux's friends about his children using the excuse that "You know how "FRIENDS" are...", yet you believe your friends about your children when in reality "you know how FRIENDS are..." also applies to your friends unless you can read their minds which I doubt you can. The fact that you don't recognize your own point should be concerning to you. You must have confused yourself when you twisted yourself into a pretzel trying rationalize how you didn't blow your own point with your own words. SMH
why do you not put these buffoons more oftenly so, inn their rightful place, you obviously have the ability, but i would guess, you are too kind. asz for myself, ill try n stick ta bean one of a
Well, two reasons.
1. He never has, so why start now, and,
2. On the rare instance where you post in coherent English, you are the one put in your place. The rest of the time, intelligent readers don't understand your babble and move on.
Being career military, I spent a fair amount of time deployed away from home and my late wife took care of child rearing when I was gone and was better at it than me. Kids told me she was actually stricter than I was. My wife and I were however on the same page regarding child rearing.
feel free Bugsy, to put me in my place, and we'll see how that works out for ya, ,for real. Personally, i would recommend against it, but, since you guys "always" put me in my place, what could i possibly do to defend myself ? well, i will try my best, do be gentle, cause i am delicate.....
1. I'm a she and yes I have. See conversation above.
2. If you can't understand igknorantzrulz, that's your problem.
Why do you act like the news outlets are keeping this quiet?
They're not. It's just not news. Or newsworthy.
Another rock for him to pull around as he is wandering through hell.
There are age appropriate ways to address the situation. No indoctrination needs to occur to let a child know that their questions are valid.
When laws are written to proscribe:
under the ostentatious heading of "parental rights", the state is in effect saying that some parents (i.e. those that do not agree with LGBTQ issues) have more rights than other parents.
That is not a protection of parental rights. That is a denial of parental rights.
The premise of this article skirts totally around this issue and tries to paint it as if he protecting children. If he is protecting children and they apparently cannot understand what he is protecting them from, what is he supposed to say when one of those bright children ask him how he is protecting them? Give them a big, blue sharpie and tell them,"Don't ask questions!"?
And finally, the legislation itself states " prohibiting classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in certain grade levels or in a specified manner" so the legislation is not entirely about only the kindergarten through 3rd grade students, but actually all students, in any grade. The article doesn't say this. So, the article is actually being disingenuous in its contention that
So, basically another hit piece to make one think that the MSM is lying to you, when in fact, it is the other way around.
Have a nice day!
Exactly, the legislation additionally requires schools to notify parents if there is a change in services for a student or any additional monitoring for their “mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being.” This is a result of Florida County "school-guides" such as this one in Leon County, which instructs school employees not to out a student to their parents. One from Martin County informs employees says that it is never appropriate to divulge the sexual orientation of a student to a parent.
Parents can't handle the truth and this is best kept on school grounds without parental interference.
Well, I am all for full disclosure, damn the consequences. If the parents can't handle it, well, they need to mature in their attitudes.
Here is the full text of the law.
Oh, so you support that part of the law, just not the prohibition on gender identity or sexual orientation classroom discussions in kindergarten through third grade.
I feel that it is very important to face reality as it presents itself and to deal with it accordingly. If any person cannot deal with reality, then they are the one with the problem.
That said, I do realize that if a child is afraid of their parent's reaction to news that they are not "straight", then measures should be taken to assure they are kept safe.
This is not a black and white question and it takes time and effort to figure out each case. Maybe I was hasty with my application of opinion, but I still feel that telling it "as it is" is very important.
“Parents can't handle the truth and this is best kept on school grounds without parental interference.”
In what world do you exclude parents from anything involving their child?
It is incumbent upon any entity that cares for a child outside the home to have the ability to address any issue of concern to the primary caregiver first, and the appropriate agencies as required.
Not sure what is being defended here, other than partisan dogma.
This law will be neutered by the courts the first time a busybody parent tries to sue a queer teacher.
There is an awfully lot of "prohibiting of prohibiting" and "prohibiting" going on....
Sue a queer teacher for what?
The law as written is vauge and is being setup up to allow a parent to sue based on anything they perceive as "classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity." So a queer teacher that mentions their homelife in class could be sued. Or a teacher talks to a student of queer parents within earshot of a classroom, that too can be targeted. It's all about restricting queer rights.
" 3. Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards."
What word(s) should "instruction" have been replaced by?
The law should be struck down and busy body populist alt+righters should stop trying to legislate their fucked up ignorant morality.
By the courts? On what grounds?
should stop trying to legislate
Apparently, they did more than try.
That kinda reeks with state approved indoctrination.
Talk about indoctrination!
Exactly, who needs simple statements about what students are expected to know or do as a result of their class? These examples from K are ridiculous:
- Count to 100 by ones and by tens.
- Read and write numerals from 0 to 20
- Demonstrate understanding of the organization and basic features of print.
--Follow words from left to right, top to bottom, and page by page.
--Recognize that spoken words are represented in written language by specific sequences of letters.
--Understand that words are separated by spaces in print.
--Recognize and name all upper- and lowercase letters of the alphabet.
- Observe that things that make sound vibrate.
When an article starts out with conservative conspiracy theories like "Despite the corrupt media's best efforts" you can tell the rest is going to be pretty much worthless.
How about we pass a law that banns the teaching of conspiracy theories to children. No more trying to convince them that Santa Claus, a 'deep state' or a 'corrupt MSM' exist, no teaching of young earth theory, no teaching climate change denial and no trying to convince them that vaccines are useless or are some attempt at government mind control. Perhaps if we did that we wouldn't have so many miserable brain dead morons trying to push their lies on everyone while attacking others simply because they're different.
The fact is this Florida law is just red meat for conservatives and is completely unnecessary. I live in a very liberal area of CA and there aren't any teachers or school curriculums here that have "lessons on sexual orientation or gender identity" in those grades. I guess conservatives are just desperate for the next outrage since they have absolutely nothing better to do with their time and seem to feed off imagining themselves the perennial victim. For many I've no doubt it has to do with their religious indoctrination where they were told they would be persecuted by Satan and his demons but that they should wear that persecution as a badge of honor. Now they go around demanding everyone validate their religion and anyone who refuses is accused of persecuting them.
And as Walter White once said to Jessie Pinkman..“Smoking marijuana, eating Cheetos, and masturbating do not constitute plans in my book.”
I really don't care what you do in private, Vic. But you can have at it.
"Kylie worked as ... as an editor and producer at National Geographic."
For two months from November 2018 to December 2018 where she had all of 2 travel articles published, one of which extolled the wonders of Cuba and the other the wondrous playgrounds of the rich and bored.
Just who is Kylee we may never know cuz Kylee "doesn't want you to know":
Keep your kids away from Kylee.
Good catch, that makes all the difference. We need an article on this law written by a gay, educator that has lived in Florida.
I'll settle for an honest article written by any neutered or spayed pronoun. Some humorous transmogrification please!
So how is that you see the law as a simple read then?
Then even you can recognize that when it says:
It MEANS 'prohibiting classroom discussion'.
Thanks for playing.
Your comment is a strawman fallacy.
So they DID prohibit classroom discussion.
We're getting somewhere.
Now, WHAT does "or in a specified manner" MEAN?
While you're at it, you may as well address this part too:
You may what to review the statute for these phantom 'state standards' they refer to.
For those of us who understand the principles of logic and have an adult vocabulary, it's not nonsense at all.
Get a dictionary.
Well there's the Texan circle jerk in full form. Since there's only 2 of y'all here, perhaps it would be more appropriate for you two to get a room...