Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
WhiskeyCash

Libs going after kids

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Do they? Or is it just fear mongering and passing bills making it illegal for bogeymen to hide under beds? 

Every one of these bills that has passed restricts from teaching this  to young kids. It doesn’t prohibit it for older ones. What’s the problem? The “don’t say gay” (lie) bill is k-4. You really have a problem with that? Why? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Every one of these bills that has passed restricts from teaching this  to young kids. It doesn’t prohibit it for older ones. What’s the problem? The “don’t say gay” (lie) bill is k-4. You really have a problem with that? Why? 

That isn’t true. The “don’t say gay” bill says:

Quote

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.

Everything after the words “grade 3” applies to kids of all grades. No guidelines are given as to what “age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate” means. There are no state standards for it, which makes it extremely vague.

Vague laws with harsh penalties? That’s the entire point of this bill. Teachers cannot be sure if even mentioning homosexuality will land them in jail. Which, I would argue, is the intended consequence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dogcows said:

That isn’t true. The “don’t say gay” bill says:

Everything after the words “grade 3” applies to kids of all grades. No guidelines are given as to what “age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate” means. There are no state standards for it, which makes it extremely vague.

Vague laws with harsh penalties? That’s the entire point of this bill. Teachers cannot be sure if even mentioning homosexuality will land them in jail. 

I’ll trust them to restrict it to the intended ages. If not then they can kick up a fuss. Again, why is this so important? Why are you more concerned with sex Ed in Florida than reading scores in Baltimore? If you claim to care so much about the kids? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Because all teachers are “woke” (what’s the meaning of that word today?) and trying to indoctrinate kids? 🙄.

As for the law, why do we need a law telling kids they can’t talk about their own bodies? I’ve pointed out the potential negative effects of the law. Perhaps somebody could enlighten me as to what its positive effects might be? Seems like pure virtue signaling.

Who said all teachers are woke; are we adding straw men as well?  All people aren't rapists but we have laws against it.  

Here is an example of the Left solving problems which don't exist:  Katie "I couldn't run an election so they made me governor" Hobbs signed an order here in AZ banning discrimination against hair textures and styles.

Quote

PHOENIX (3TV/CBS 5) -- Gov. Katie Hobbs signed an executive order on Friday afternoon prohibiting discrimination based on someone’s hair. Hobbs was joined by Beverely Elliott, Executive Director of the African American Museum of Southern Arizona, Janelle Wood, Founder of Black Mother’s Forum, Donna Williams, President of the Phoenix Chapter of The National Coalition of 100 Black Women, and others.

The executive order will ban state agencies from discriminating against someone based on hair texture or styles, including braids, locs, twists, knots and headwraps. “For far too long Black women, men, and children have been deprived of educational and employment opportunities for wearing their natural hair,” said Governor Hobbs. “Today, I am issuing an Executive Order that demonstrates the need to prioritize the protection of culture, and allows individuals to show up as their true selves without being subjected to race-based hair discrimination.”

https://www.azfamily.com/2023/03/18/gov-hobbs-signs-order-banning-discrimination-based-hair/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Who said all teachers are woke; are we adding straw men as well?  All people aren't rapists but we have laws against it.  

Here is an example of the Left solving problems which don't exist:  Katie "I couldn't run an election so they made me governor" Hobbs signed an order here in AZ banning discrimination against hair textures and styles.

https://www.azfamily.com/2023/03/18/gov-hobbs-signs-order-banning-discrimination-based-hair/

The Army already did something similar a couple years ago. And perhaps you don’t realize it, but it is an actual problem that affects black girls.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/how-we-rise/2021/02/23/penalizing-black-hair-in-the-name-of-academic-success-is-undeniably-racist-unfounded-and-against-the-law/

And I’m not the one introducing straw men. You are the one who brought up teachers supposedly logging onto Tumblr and talking to kids about whatever they saw instead of teaching. Do you really think that is a big problem? I was simply rebutting that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dogcows said:

The Army already did something similar a couple years ago. And perhaps you don’t realize it, but it is an actual problem that affects black girls.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/how-we-rise/2021/02/23/penalizing-black-hair-in-the-name-of-academic-success-is-undeniably-racist-unfounded-and-against-the-law/

And I’m not the one introducing straw men. You are the one who brought up teachers supposedly logging onto Tumblr and talking to kids about whatever they saw instead of teaching. Do you really think that is a big problem? I was simply rebutting that.

I know it's against the law; why do we need another law against it?  I thought you were the great hater of legislatures over-legislating.  :dunno: 

And your first two posts in this thread about the Netflix video were (1) The "Republicans hate their own daughters" bill, and (2) The "Republicans want to beat up special needs kids" bill.  You must have gotten a new carton of shotgun shells to blast around here.  :thumbsup:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I know it's against the law; why do we need another law against it?  I thought you were the great hater of legislatures over-legislating.  :dunno: 

And your first two posts in this thread about the Netflix video were (1) The "Republicans hate their own daughters" bill, and (2) The "Republicans want to beat up special needs kids" bill.  You must have gotten a new carton of shotgun shells to blast around here.  :thumbsup:

 

The thread says “Libs going after kids” which I am rebutting by showing it’s actually right-wing legislatures doing it. 

And discriminating based on hair is not generally against the law, which is why they are passing laws now. Probably the highest-profile example was a wrestler who was forced to choose between cutting off his hair or forfeiting a wrestling match. At the time, that action, while hurtful to the child, was perfectly legal. More examples here:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-hair-discrimination-impacts-black-americans-in-their-personal-lives-and-the-workplace

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BuckSwope said:

Something tells me there is info missing on this one.  I'm guessing a similar conversation as was had on FBGs.  

He mentioned here. I never posted on any other site. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, seafoam1 said:

He mentioned here. I never posted on any other site. 

 

There was a similar conversation on FBGs.  A couple posting that they have helped their kids in the shower or something, and then others hammering them on it as though they were in there naked and fondling their kids.   It's the internet, it's what we do.    I was just saying my guess is that similar conversation and result happened here.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BuckSwope said:

 

There was a similar conversation on FBGs.  A couple posting that they have helped their kids in the shower or something, and then others hammering them on it as though they were in there naked and fondling their kids.   It's the internet, it's what we do.    I was just saying my guess is that similar conversation and result happened here.  

He said he "takes showers with his 6 year old daughter. Naked."

That's not "helping" anyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

He said he "takes showers with his 6 year old daughter. Naked."

That's not "helping" anyone. 

If so, slightly different conversation as over there.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

If so, slightly different conversation as over there.  

Timcrotch already bored that place to tears and therefore had that place shut down so it doesn't matter much anyways. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Timcrotch already bored that place to tears and therefore had that place shut down so it doesn't matter much anyways. 

How do you know?  You said you never posted on any other site.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

How do you know?  You said you never posted on any other site.  

It was posted here. And I believe the non liberals on this site. Plus, it only makes sense given the crap he posts here.

You remind me of him a lot.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BuckSwope said:

 

There was a similar conversation on FBGs.  A couple posting that they have helped their kids in the shower or something, and then others hammering them on it as though they were in there naked and fondling their kids.   It's the internet, it's what we do.    I was just saying my guess is that similar conversation and result happened here.  

Nope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dogcows said:

The thread says “Libs going after kids” which I am rebutting by showing it’s actually right-wing legislatures doing it. 

And discriminating based on hair is not generally against the law, which is why they are passing laws now. Probably the highest-profile example was a wrestler who was forced to choose between cutting off his hair or forfeiting a wrestling match. At the time, that action, while hurtful to the child, was perfectly legal. More examples here:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-hair-discrimination-impacts-black-americans-in-their-personal-lives-and-the-workplace

I stand corrected; I thought it was illegal in AZ, but it's only in certain cities.  Which I'd have known if I read the last paragraph of my own link.  😜

Protect the nap, Katie!  :thumbsup: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2023 at 9:19 AM, BuckSwope said:

Something tells me there is info missing on this one.  I'm guessing a similar conversation as was had on FBGs.  

For the love of God, please change your screen name immediately. I came across this freak quoted in an article and now I associate the two. Please!!!!

 

"Buck Angel is an American pornographic film actor, producer and sex educator. He is the founder of the media production company Buck Angel Entertainment. A transsexual man, he received the 2007 AVN Award as Transsexual Performer of the Year; he now works as an advocate and educator."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, League Champion said:

For the love of God, please change your screen name immediately. I came across this freak quoted in an article and now I associate the two. Please!!!!

 

"Buck Angel is an American pornographic film actor, producer and sex educator. He is the founder of the media production company Buck Angel Entertainment. A transsexual man, he received the 2007 AVN Award as Transsexual Performer of the Year; he now works as an advocate and educator."

It took me about 2 months to get this damn name. FFT didn't want me as a member to begin with, I think.  Lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MDC said:

I take baths with my dog. Is that weird?

Dunno.  You naked while doing that activity? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×