I may be necroing, but this bill suddenly got a lot worse. An ammendment was added which also requires schools to out LGBT students, even if it puts them at risk of neglect and abuse.
@Maroxad: That's how you interpreted the amendment?
The second portion is detailing that if the schools know it has 6 weeks to inform the parent of what they know. It's required to facilitate the disclosure as well.
@Maroxad: That's how you interpreted the amendment?
Did you read the second part of what I linked?
Cruelty is not only the point, but similar stuff like this have been done before.
The original bill, already demanded that schools out LGBT students to their parents, provided it does not lead to a risk of the child facing neglect or abuse. This amendment removes that limitation. Now Schools have to do it even IF it will put a child's well being in jeopardy.
@Maroxad: That's how you interpreted the amendment?
The second portion is detailing that if the schools know it has 6 weeks to inform the parent of what they know. It's required to facilitate the disclosure as well.
Correct, to allow a buffer for any additional resources/protective services to be involved if there's any neglect/abuse suspected.
@Maroxad said:
Did you read the second part of what I linked?
Cruelty is not only the point, but similar stuff like this have been done before.
I read the entirety. You believe the government should withhold a child's information from the parents? Should the government also facilitate medical decisions without a parent's consent and/or knowledge?
@Maroxad: That's how you interpreted the amendment?
The second portion is detailing that if the schools know it has 6 weeks to inform the parent of what they know. It's required to facilitate the disclosure as well.
Correct, to allow a buffer for any additional resources/protective services to be involved if there's any neglect/abuse suspected.
@Maroxad said:
Did you read the second part of what I linked?
Cruelty is not only the point, but similar stuff like this have been done before.
I read the entirety. You believe the government should withhold a child's information from the parents? Should the government also facilitate medical decisions without a parent's consent and/or knowledge?
Actually, he read that, virtually line for line from the Twitter page of a politician. The reason why Maroxad included the photo, and typed out the narrative himself rather than link the Twitter was because we would immediately realize this is a democrat politician talking out his ass in an election year. He repeated the narrative as if it was his own independent thought. ROFLMAO.
And Maroxad. FFS, if you're going to run around calling yourself an intellectual, at least TRY to have a legitimate independent thought.
I read the entirety. You believe the government should withhold a child's information from the parents? Should the government also facilitate medical decisions without a parent's consent and/or knowledge?
Moving the goalposts?
And children should have the right to privacy away from their parents. This bill denies them that right.
@eoten said:
Actually, he read that, virtually line for line from the Twitter page of a politician. The reason why Maroxad included the photo, and typed out the narrative himself rather than link the Twitter was because we would immediately realize this is a democrat politician talking out his ass in an election year. He repeated the narrative as if it was his own independent thought. ROFLMAO.
And Maroxad. FFS, if you're going to run around calling yourself an intellectual, at least TRY to have a legitimate independent thought.
I included the image only because the tweet was redundant with what I was already posting. And it is FAR from just that politician, basic reading comprehension and understanding of what the bill stated before, would bring anyone to the same conclusion.
And your last point is silly. I am just another guy on a gaming forum with an opinion. Just because you are wrong on damn near everything doesnt mean I am trying to portray myself as intelligent or anything. Just because you are wrong on nearly everything doesnt mean everyone else is calling themselves smart. At most we have been pointing out obvious deficiencies on your end.
Correct, to allow a buffer for any additional resources/protective services to be involved if there's any neglect/abuse suspected.
I read the entirety. You believe the government should withhold a child's information from the parents? Should the government also facilitate medical decisions without a parent's consent and/or knowledge?
Moving the goalposts?
And children should have the right to privacy away from their parents. This bill denies them that right.
Where does the line get drawn of when a parent is advised of what's transpiring at school? Right to privacy from your parents? What. Lol
Correct, to allow a buffer for any additional resources/protective services to be involved if there's any neglect/abuse suspected.
I read the entirety. You believe the government should withhold a child's information from the parents? Should the government also facilitate medical decisions without a parent's consent and/or knowledge?
Moving the goalposts?
And children should have the right to privacy away from their parents. This bill denies them that right.
Where does the line get drawn of when a parent is advised of what's transpiring at school? Right to privacy from your parents? What. Lol
yeah I don't get this, what's the issue with schools keeping parents informed about their kids.
these are peoples kids, there is no "confidentiality" with school. Maybe if it is their personal therapist? But a school? nah schools should be letting parents know what's happening to their kids at school, especially if there are issues, disruptions, bullying, fights, acting out, bad grades, keep the parents in the know with their kids what's wrong with that?
@Stevo_the_gamer: I for one don't believe helicopter parenting is a good way to deal with things. Nor do I believe in surveillance states.
Just confirming, lol, you don't believe in surveillance states but believe the state should make decisions on the wellbeing of a child without a parents input?
@sargentd A school letting children know in SOME cases is reasonable. Especially if the child is underperforming, bullying, signs of mental illness (such as depression) or something similar.
However, being LGBT is benign. But yet, members of the LGBT community find themselves under a lot of prejudice.
A child being LGBT is none of their parents business.
@Stevo_the_gamer said:
@Maroxad said:
@Stevo_the_gamer: I for one don't believe helicopter parenting is a good way to deal with things. Nor do I believe in surveillance states.
Just confirming, lol, you don't believe in surveillance states but believe the state should make decisions on the wellbeing of a child without a parents input?
Look again at the context of this amendment.
The bill originally stated that in the case of what most would consider to be abusive parents, exceptions can be made. The Amendment however, opened up room so that even if the newfound knowledge could lead to abuse and neglect. This amendment, only allows clearly abusive parents have more information on their own kids. These children have every right to keep secrets from their parents.
Policies like these have been shown to lead to more suicide. Is this what you want?
And yes, I believe the greater society is in a much better position to determine what is right for some children than a *lot* of parents are. ESPECIALLY when it is already more or less confirmed that they are being abusive.
Correct, to allow a buffer for any additional resources/protective services to be involved if there's any neglect/abuse suspected.
I read the entirety. You believe the government should withhold a child's information from the parents? Should the government also facilitate medical decisions without a parent's consent and/or knowledge?
Moving the goalposts?
And children should have the right to privacy away from their parents. This bill denies them that right.
Where does the line get drawn of when a parent is advised of what's transpiring at school? Right to privacy from your parents? What. Lol
yeah I don't get this, what's the issue with schools keeping parents informed about their kids.
these are peoples kids, there is no "confidentiality" with school. Maybe if it is their personal therapist? But a school? nah schools should be letting parents know what's happening to their kids at school, especially if there are issues, disruptions, bullying, fights, acting out, bad grades, keep the parents in the know with their kids what's wrong with that?
What if this leads to more suicides though? I thought gay kids had high suicide rates or something.
@Maroxad: That's how you interpreted the amendment?
The second portion is detailing that if the schools know it has 6 weeks to inform the parent of what they know. It's required to facilitate the disclosure as well.
Correct, to allow a buffer for any additional resources/protective services to be involved if there's any neglect/abuse suspected.
These schools are going to be forbidden from even mentioning the term 'gay/homosexual' and you want us to believe that this is a move to protect these same homosexual students they are refusing the acknowledge?
That is some twisted logic if I've ever seen it. Congrats on the absurd justification.
These schools are going to be forbidden from even mentioning the term 'gay/homosexual' and you want us to believe that this is a move to protect these same homosexual students they are refusing the acknowledge?
That is some twisted logic if I've ever seen it. Congrats on the absurd justification.
You can believe whatever your heart desires but I'm not sure where teaching material and administrators/school staff finding a "safe space" for a child to facilitate dialogue are on the same sheet of music. I'd say it's pretty bizarre to put teachers on the same field as politicians who legislated this in this context. :)
@Maroxad: That's how you interpreted the amendment?
Did you read the second part of what I linked?
Cruelty is not only the point, but similar stuff like this have been done before.
The original bill, already demanded that schools out LGBT students to their parents, provided it does not lead to a risk of the child facing neglect or abuse. This amendment removes that limitation. Now Schools have to do it even IF it will put a child's well being in jeopardy.
It sounds like they are essentially telling kids to stay in the closet, because if you discuss it at all, we will tell your parents.
And while many parents are understanding, many also will try to pray the gay away, send them to camps, or disown their kids.
It sounds like they are essentially telling kids to stay in the closet, because if you discuss it at all, we will tell your parents.
And while many parents are understanding, many also will try to pray the gay away, send them to camps, or disown their kids.
Yeah, I think this a big overreach on the part of the government. I doubt many elementary and grade schools are really delving into sexuality in their classrooms. Seems like a pointless bill.
@sargentd A school letting children know in SOME cases is reasonable. Especially if the child is underperforming, bullying, signs of mental illness (such as depression) or something similar.
However, being LGBT is benign. But yet, members of the LGBT community find themselves under a lot of prejudice.
A child being LGBT is none of their parents business.
@Stevo_the_gamer said:
@Maroxad said:
@Stevo_the_gamer: I for one don't believe helicopter parenting is a good way to deal with things. Nor do I believe in surveillance states.
Just confirming, lol, you don't believe in surveillance states but believe the state should make decisions on the wellbeing of a child without a parents input?
Look again at the context of this amendment.
The bill originally stated that in the case of what most would consider to be abusive parents, exceptions can be made. The Amendment however, opened up room so that even if the newfound knowledge could lead to abuse and neglect. This amendment, only allows clearly abusive parents have more information on their own kids. These children have every right to keep secrets from their parents.
Policies like these have been shown to lead to more suicide. Is this what you want?
And yes, I believe the greater society is in a much better position to determine what is right for some children than a *lot* of parents are. ESPECIALLY when it is already more or less confirmed that they are being abusive.
So you're saying if the school thinks the parent MIGHT be abusive that they can make an executive decision about their children? No proof? No actual crime? But schools take over parenting and all they have to do is claim they think the parent MIGHT be abusive? Do you not see the issue with that line of thinking? Where does that end exactly? Parents are the parents, how their child is raised is their job, not the schools. If an actual crime is committed in that process, then we have laws to handle that. But schools do not get to overrule parents on how their children are raised, especially when it's within the law.
And whether you want to realize it or not, or pretend it doesn't exist, we have groups of people who seek out teaching jobs specifically to manipulate what children think and believe to something more in line with a social or political ideology. That's wrong, and it's dangerous, and yes, it happens, and it's happening more and more now. For someone who claims he's against a surveillance state, you should have a problem with people projecting their political and social beliefs onto other people's children. Same as I would have a problem if a school tried to project religious beliefs onto other people's children against their parents wishes.
So you're saying if the school thinks the parent MIGHT be abusive that they can make an executive decision about their children? No proof? No actual crime? But schools take over parenting and all they have to do is claim they think the parent MIGHT be abusive? Do you not see the issue with that line of thinking? Where does that end exactly? Parents are the parents, how their child is raised is their job, not the schools. If an actual crime is committed in that process, then we have laws to handle that. But schools do not get to overrule parents on how their children are raised, especially when it's within the law.
And whether you want to realize it or not, or pretend it doesn't exist, we have groups of people who seek out teaching jobs specifically to manipulate what children think and believe to something more in line with a social or political ideology. That's wrong, and it's dangerous, and yes, it happens, and it's happening more and more now. For someone who claims he's against a surveillance state, you should have a problem with people projecting their political and social beliefs onto other people's children. Same as I would have a problem if a school tried to project religious beliefs onto other people's children against their parents wishes.
Not ratting out the students on being LGBT is not an executive decision.
The point of this amendment is to keep students in the closet in schools as well as home. This is about giving parents more control of their children, at the expense of the child's autonomy. And children having a lack of autonomy is already a severe problem as it is. The so called "Bubble-wrap" upbringing, is causing serious issues in physical, cognitive and social developments.
@Maroxad: That's how you interpreted the amendment?
Did you read the second part of what I linked?
Cruelty is not only the point, but similar stuff like this have been done before.
The original bill, already demanded that schools out LGBT students to their parents, provided it does not lead to a risk of the child facing neglect or abuse. This amendment removes that limitation. Now Schools have to do it even IF it will put a child's well being in jeopardy.
It sounds like they are essentially telling kids to stay in the closet, because if you discuss it at all, we will tell your parents.
And while many parents are understanding, many also will try to pray the gay away, send them to camps, or disown their kids.
That is ultimately the point of this bill too.
There are 2 camps of parents in this context.
In camp A: There are the reasonable ones, who will respond with indifference or support.
In camp B: There are those who are bigots, and WILL try respond very negatively towards their child being non-straight/non-cis. Which can lead to further abandonment/abuse.
And we both know which camp this amendment empowers. As the other camp would be told already.
So you're saying if the school thinks the parent MIGHT be abusive that they can make an executive decision about their children? No proof? No actual crime? But schools take over parenting and all they have to do is claim they think the parent MIGHT be abusive? Do you not see the issue with that line of thinking? Where does that end exactly? Parents are the parents, how their child is raised is their job, not the schools. If an actual crime is committed in that process, then we have laws to handle that. But schools do not get to overrule parents on how their children are raised, especially when it's within the law.
And whether you want to realize it or not, or pretend it doesn't exist, we have groups of people who seek out teaching jobs specifically to manipulate what children think and believe to something more in line with a social or political ideology. That's wrong, and it's dangerous, and yes, it happens, and it's happening more and more now. For someone who claims he's against a surveillance state, you should have a problem with people projecting their political and social beliefs onto other people's children. Same as I would have a problem if a school tried to project religious beliefs onto other people's children against their parents wishes.
Not ratting out the students on being LGBT is not an executive decision.
The point of this amendment is to keep students in the closet in schools as well as home. This is about giving parents more control of their children, at the expense of the child's autonomy. And children having a lack of autonomy is already a severe problem as it is. The so called "Bubble-wrap" upbringing, is causing serious issues in physical, cognitive and social developments.
Autonomy? What in the **** are you talking about? These are children. You do understand what and who parents are in relation to children, right? You do understand how raising children works, don't you? Parents have a right to decide how their children are raised. They have a right to know what goes on with them in the schools they go to. To reasonable people, it sounds like you people just want schools to push an agenda on children and their parents have no right to know about it.
The bill says parents have more say in deciding what is taught in these classrooms. That's ultimately what you people have a problem with.
Also, this bill primary covers grade school. If you think 6 and 7 year old's not having autonomy from their parents is a "severe problem", I can only laugh at you.
Autonomy? What in the **** are you talking about? These are children. You do understand what and who parents are in relation to children, right? You do understand how raising children works, don't you? Parents have a right to decide how their children are raised. They have a right to know what goes on with them in the schools they go to. To reasonable people, it sounds like you people just want schools to push an agenda on children and their parents have no right to know about it.
The bill says parents have more say in deciding what is taught in these classrooms. That's ultimately what you people have a problem with.
Also, this bill primary covers grade school. If you think 6 and 7 year old's not having autonomy from their parents is a "severe problem", I can only laugh at you.
You don't think children should have autonomy?
Not only are you once again showing your clear distaste for positive freedom. But you are also setting up children to fail. You do realize that a lack of independence and autonomy is causing a LOT of issues for the development of a child?
The House Arrest until they get a driver's license is bad enough, but now children are not allowed to have private thoughts and feelings too?
But don't take my word for it, afterall. Like I said before, I am just another guy on a gaming forum with an opinion. Instead of listening to me however, look at where the happiest children in the world live. That would be the Netherlands. Where parents dont have this miguided delusion that children have to be monitored 24/7, as if the parents themselves were Big Brother.
Children at the ages of 6-8 are perfectly capable of doing stuff on their own without surveillance or supervision. Such as biking to a store or school. And there are far more risks associated with THAT, than whatever culture wars nonsense the GOP is pushing.
These schools are going to be forbidden from even mentioning the term 'gay/homosexual' and you want us to believe that this is a move to protect these same homosexual students they are refusing the acknowledge?
That is some twisted logic if I've ever seen it. Congrats on the absurd justification.
You can believe whatever your heart desires but I'm not sure where teaching material and administrators/school staff finding a "safe space" for a child to facilitate dialogue are on the same sheet of music. I'd say it's pretty bizarre to put teachers on the same field as politicians who legislated this in this context. :)
Unless of course this 'safe space' isn't safe, which is exactly one of the problems pointed out by this amendment.
Unless of course this 'safe space' isn't safe, which is exactly one of the problems pointed out by this amendment.
Then they report such to the authorities. Pretty simple really, and not uncommon with that level of cooperation, especially with availability of school resource officers.
@eoten said:
Autonomy? What in the **** are you talking about? These are children. You do understand what and who parents are in relation to children, right? You do understand how raising children works, don't you? Parents have a right to decide how their children are raised. They have a right to know what goes on with them in the schools they go to. To reasonable people, it sounds like you people just want schools to push an agenda on children and their parents have no right to know about it.
The bill says parents have more say in deciding what is taught in these classrooms. That's ultimately what you people have a problem with.
Also, this bill primary covers grade school. If you think 6 and 7 year old's not having autonomy from their parents is a "severe problem", I can only laugh at you.
Yeah, pretty speechless. Actually, rather reminiscent of mantra we see in grooming investigations.
Unless of course this 'safe space' isn't safe, which is exactly one of the problems pointed out by this amendment.
Then they report such to the authorities. Pretty simple really, and not uncommon with that level of cooperation, especially with availability of school resource officers.
@eoten said:
Autonomy? What in the **** are you talking about? These are children. You do understand what and who parents are in relation to children, right? You do understand how raising children works, don't you? Parents have a right to decide how their children are raised. They have a right to know what goes on with them in the schools they go to. To reasonable people, it sounds like you people just want schools to push an agenda on children and their parents have no right to know about it.
The bill says parents have more say in deciding what is taught in these classrooms. That's ultimately what you people have a problem with.
Also, this bill primary covers grade school. If you think 6 and 7 year old's not having autonomy from their parents is a "severe problem", I can only laugh at you.
Yeah, pretty speechless. Actually, rather reminiscent of mantra we see in grooming investigations.
You are the ones rationalizing literal grooming here. Children are NOT property of their parents, they are under their custody, which is quite different in several significant ways.
We are not talking about Children making some questionable connections that could put their well being into danger.
Autonomy? What in the **** are you talking about? These are children. You do understand what and who parents are in relation to children, right? You do understand how raising children works, don't you? Parents have a right to decide how their children are raised. They have a right to know what goes on with them in the schools they go to. To reasonable people, it sounds like you people just want schools to push an agenda on children and their parents have no right to know about it.
The bill says parents have more say in deciding what is taught in these classrooms. That's ultimately what you people have a problem with.
Also, this bill primary covers grade school. If you think 6 and 7 year old's not having autonomy from their parents is a "severe problem", I can only laugh at you.
You don't think children should have autonomy?
Not only are you once again showing your clear distaste for positive freedom. But you are also setting up children to fail. You do realize that a lack of independence and autonomy is causing a LOT of issues for the development of a child?
The House Arrest until they get a driver's license is bad enough, but now children are not allowed to have private thoughts and feelings too?
But don't take my word for it, afterall. Like I said before, I am just another guy on a gaming forum with an opinion. Instead of listening to me however, look at where the happiest children in the world live. That would be the Netherlands. Where parents dont have this miguided delusion that children have to be monitored 24/7, as if the parents themselves were Big Brother.
Children at the ages of 6-8 are perfectly capable of doing stuff on their own without surveillance or supervision. Such as biking to a store or school. And there are far more risks associated with THAT, than whatever culture wars nonsense the GOP is pushing.
Either you're not hearing yourself, are trolling, or have no idea what "autonomy" actually means. There's a pretty big difference between not having autonomy, which is the ability to govern their own lives, and "not allowed to have private thoughts and feelings." Autonomy would mean they could decide what to eat for dinner, whether or not they should go to school, what time they should go to bed. Do you even understand the concept of raising a child? FFS.
And then you use stupid strawmans to make a leap from not being autonomous to not being allowed to have their own private thoughts or equating it to 24/7 monitoring because you're simply just not acting in good faith at this point.
Unless of course this 'safe space' isn't safe, which is exactly one of the problems pointed out by this amendment.
Then they report such to the authorities. Pretty simple really, and not uncommon with that level of cooperation, especially with availability of school resource officers.
@eoten said:
Autonomy? What in the **** are you talking about? These are children. You do understand what and who parents are in relation to children, right? You do understand how raising children works, don't you? Parents have a right to decide how their children are raised. They have a right to know what goes on with them in the schools they go to. To reasonable people, it sounds like you people just want schools to push an agenda on children and their parents have no right to know about it.
The bill says parents have more say in deciding what is taught in these classrooms. That's ultimately what you people have a problem with.
Also, this bill primary covers grade school. If you think 6 and 7 year old's not having autonomy from their parents is a "severe problem", I can only laugh at you.
Yeah, pretty speechless. Actually, rather reminiscent of mantra we see in grooming investigations.
Oh hell yeah, it's the mantra we often hear from the types who also think children should be also able to consent to sexual intercourse with adults, as every age of consent law exists on the premise that children are not autonomous.
Unless of course this 'safe space' isn't safe, which is exactly one of the problems pointed out by this amendment.
Then they report such to the authorities. Pretty simple really, and not uncommon with that level of cooperation, especially with availability of school resource officers.
@eoten said:
Autonomy? What in the **** are you talking about? These are children. You do understand what and who parents are in relation to children, right? You do understand how raising children works, don't you? Parents have a right to decide how their children are raised. They have a right to know what goes on with them in the schools they go to. To reasonable people, it sounds like you people just want schools to push an agenda on children and their parents have no right to know about it.
The bill says parents have more say in deciding what is taught in these classrooms. That's ultimately what you people have a problem with.
Also, this bill primary covers grade school. If you think 6 and 7 year old's not having autonomy from their parents is a "severe problem", I can only laugh at you.
Yeah, pretty speechless. Actually, rather reminiscent of mantra we see in grooming investigations.
You are the ones rationalizing literal grooming here. Children are NOT property of their parents, they are under their custody, which is quite different in several significant ways.
We are not talking about Children making some questionable connections that could put their well being into danger.
Actually, you are talking about things that could potentially put their well being in danger. Children get sexually abused by teachers and coaches more frequently than anyone you're going to find on some sex offender registry. If any teacher is having sexual conversations with a child, and keeping it hush hush from the parents, you don't think that exposes children to an environment that could easily lead to abuse?
FIrst off, you're trying to justify teachers having that kind of conversation at all with gradeschool children which is pretty ridiculous already. Then you're trying to scream about a bill that requires them by law NOT to keep a secret from the children's parents. You may want to take a step back and take a better look at that, and what that will absolutely lead to.
Parents abso-fucking-lutely have a right to know what interactions teachers are having with their children, if for no other reason than for the safety of their children.
@eoten Do you even have any idea of what part of this bill we are being concerned with? We are talking about Teachers ratting out students to their parents, even if this will inevitably lead up to abuse or neglect. This is what the amendment does. The bill prior to that amendment, had at least that protection. Now that protection is being removed.
I dont know why you went on the other tangent. Even if you are completely wrong (as always).
The fact is, you are advocating for giving away a child's own autonomy in favor of narcissitic control freaks who happen to also be parents.
Also, Autonomy works in a spectrum. Being allowed to have their own thoughts and feelings is a part of being autonomous. One which this bill is looking to eradicate, especially following this amendment. As parents, now have the ability to push surveillance on their children through their teachers.
@eoten Do you even have any idea of what part of this bill we are being concerned with? We are talking about Teachers ratting out students to their parents, even if this will inevitably lead up to abuse or neglect. This is what the amendment does. The bill prior to that amendment, had at least that protection. Now that protection is being removed.
I dont know why you went on the other tangent. Even if you are completely wrong (as always).
The fact is, you are advocating for giving away a child's own autonomy in favor of narcissitic control freaks who happen to also be parents.
Also, Autonomy works in a spectrum. Being allowed to have their own thoughts and feelings is a part of being autonomous. One which this bill is looking to eradicate, especially following this amendment. As parents, now have the ability to push surveillance on their children through their teachers.
"Ratting out?" Your choice of words tell me all I need to know about you on this. You have clearly already done whatever mental gymnastics were necessary to convince yourself that the parents are the bad guys in the matter. You have pre determined their guilt, pre-determined them to be bigots, homophobes, and whatever other phobes and isms you can think up. Without any actual evidence of that being the case. You're making up a reality that doesn't actually exist in order to oppose it.
Parents have a right to know what's going on in their children's lives. So I have no idea where someone like you gets off trying to marginalize their roles in their own child's lives. Your argument has no substance, so you have made up this delusion that some how parents being informed of what is happening with their children is somehow going to make them a victim.
@eoten Do you even have any idea of what part of this bill we are being concerned with? We are talking about Teachers ratting out students to their parents, even if this will inevitably lead up to abuse or neglect. This is what the amendment does. The bill prior to that amendment, had at least that protection. Now that protection is being removed.
I dont know why you went on the other tangent. Even if you are completely wrong (as always).
The fact is, you are advocating for giving away a child's own autonomy in favor of narcissitic control freaks who happen to also be parents.
Also, Autonomy works in a spectrum. Being allowed to have their own thoughts and feelings is a part of being autonomous. One which this bill is looking to eradicate, especially following this amendment. As parents, now have the ability to push surveillance on their children through their teachers.
"Ratting out?" Your choice of words tell me all I need to know about you on this. You have clearly already done whatever mental gymnastics were necessary to convince yourself that the parents are the bad guys in the matter. You have pre determined their guilt, pre-determined them to be bigots, homophobes, and whatever other phobes and isms you can think up. Without any actual evidence of that being the case. You're making up a reality that doesn't actually exist in order to oppose it.
Parents have a right to know what's going on in their children's lives. So I have no idea where someone like you gets off trying to marginalize their roles in their own child's lives. Your argument has no substance, so you have made up this delusion that some how parents being informed of what is happening with their children is somehow going to make them a victim.
How ridiculous.
If the children don't want their parents to know that they may be eggs, gay or bisexual, they have the right to keep those secrets from their parents. Especially as if they want to keep those things secret there is PROBABLY a good reason for that. Again, the initial protections were there for a reason, before being removed with the amendment.
Unlike you, I do not stand for the right of abusive parents to be abusive.
And this isnt all parents, the bill originally made specific restrictions in regards to certain parents. Read the bill again,
"to withhold information if a reasonably prudent person would beleive that such a disclosure would result in abuse, abandonment or neglect"
Autonomy? What in the **** are you talking about? These are children. You do understand what and who parents are in relation to children, right? You do understand how raising children works, don't you? Parents have a right to decide how their children are raised. They have a right to know what goes on with them in the schools they go to. To reasonable people, it sounds like you people just want schools to push an agenda on children and their parents have no right to know about it.
The bill says parents have more say in deciding what is taught in these classrooms. That's ultimately what you people have a problem with.
Also, this bill primary covers grade school. If you think 6 and 7 year old's not having autonomy from their parents is a "severe problem", I can only laugh at you.
@eoten Do you even have any idea of what part of this bill we are being concerned with? We are talking about Teachers ratting out students to their parents, even if this will inevitably lead up to abuse or neglect. This is what the amendment does. The bill prior to that amendment, had at least that protection. Now that protection is being removed.
I dont know why you went on the other tangent. Even if you are completely wrong (as always).
The fact is, you are advocating for giving away a child's own autonomy in favor of narcissitic control freaks who happen to also be parents.
Also, Autonomy works in a spectrum. Being allowed to have their own thoughts and feelings is a part of being autonomous. One which this bill is looking to eradicate, especially following this amendment. As parents, now have the ability to push surveillance on their children through their teachers.
"Ratting out?" Your choice of words tell me all I need to know about you on this. You have clearly already done whatever mental gymnastics were necessary to convince yourself that the parents are the bad guys in the matter. You have pre determined their guilt, pre-determined them to be bigots, homophobes, and whatever other phobes and isms you can think up. Without any actual evidence of that being the case. You're making up a reality that doesn't actually exist in order to oppose it.
Parents have a right to know what's going on in their children's lives. So I have no idea where someone like you gets off trying to marginalize their roles in their own child's lives. Your argument has no substance, so you have made up this delusion that some how parents being informed of what is happening with their children is somehow going to make them a victim.
How ridiculous.
If the children don't want their parents to know that they may be eggs, gay or bisexual, they have the right to keep those secrets from their parents. Especially as if they want to keep those things secret there is PROBABLY a good reason for that. Again, the initial protections were there for a reason, before being removed with the amendment.
Unlike you, I do not stand for the right of abusive parents to be abusive.
And this isnt all parents, the bill originally made specific restrictions in regards to certain parents. Read the bill again,
"to withhold information if a reasonably prudent person would beleive that such a disclosure would result in abuse, abandonment or neglect"
Or, more likely some activist twat with a teaching degree decided to start talking about sex in a frickin grade school classroom, a topic which children have little understanding of, and teachers shouldn't be teaching to grade school children in the first place, and knowing this, they know the parents will be pissed, so they make up these ridiculous excuses to try to do it behind their backs.
Teachers do not need to be teaching this bullshit to 6-8 year old children, period. And the fact they think it's okay is exactly why parents are demanding oversight.
When the same people run around telling everyone that gender is a social construct, however, if a boy wants to play with a barbie, it MUST because he's transgender, contradicting the original statement and position, it's pretty obvious these teachers have no idea what they're doing, and need small children to push their idiocy onto because older ones know they're full of shit.
Personhood applies here. But your question is off topic, so moving on.
@eoten said:
Or, more likely some activist twat with a teaching degree decided to start talking about sex in a frickin grade school classroom, a topic which children have little understanding of, and teachers shouldn't be teaching to grade school children in the first place, and knowing this, they know the parents will be pissed, so they make up these ridiculous excuses to try to do it behind their backs.
Teachers do not need to be teaching this bullshit to 6-8 year old children, period. And the fact they think it's okay is exactly why parents are demanding oversight.
When the same people run around telling everyone that gender is a social construct, however, if a boy wants to play with a barbie, it MUST because he's transgender, contradicting the original statement and position, it's pretty obvious these teachers have no idea what they're doing, and need small children to push their idiocy onto because older ones know they're full of shit.
What you are saying has nothing to do with the part of the bill I am bringing up and the amendment which made it worse.
And virtually no one in the transgender community is saying that. So you guys can stop with that strawman now. For someone to vetted as transgender, it takes quite a lot.
While this is a completely separate part of the republican party. Greg Abbott has ordered the Family and Protective Services to investigate ALL transgender children in Texas and prosecuting their parents as child abusers.
While these are NOT the same people and it would be fallacious to link the actions of Greg Abbott to the stuff going on in Florida. One thing is abundantly clear. The Mid Terms are upon us and the GOP are riding the culture war to try to win it.
Oh hell yeah, it's the mantra we often hear from the types who also think children should be also able to consent to sexual intercourse with adults, as every age of consent law exists on the premise that children are not autonomous.
Yeah, pretty shocking to read - especially in the context of elementary school. Yeesh.
While this is a completely separate part of the republican party. Greg Abbott has ordered the Family and Protective Services to investigate ALL transgender children in Texas and prosecuting their parents as child abusers.
While these are NOT the same people and it would be fallacious to link the actions of Greg Abbott to the stuff going on in Florida. One thing is abundantly clear. The Mid Terms are upon us and the GOP are riding the culture war to try to win it.
If someone says their 5 year old kid is transgender, there's almost certainly sadistic coercion on behalf of the parent who feel it'd help their woke status having a transgender child. So I don't have a problem with it? What? You're telling me 5 year olds know all about gender and sexuality? I bet you also think we should force toy stores by law to only have gender neutral toys on the shelves too.
Puberty blockers for children... it's child abuse. It is using a social construct (the concept you can actually pick and change gender in the first place) to go against the biological processes of the child itself and force their body, through drugs and treatments, to do something the body doesn't want to do. So people like you can pat yourselves on the back and pretend you're doing something good.
While this is a completely separate part of the republican party. Greg Abbott has ordered the Family and Protective Services to investigate ALL transgender children in Texas and prosecuting their parents as child abusers.
While these are NOT the same people and it would be fallacious to link the actions of Greg Abbott to the stuff going on in Florida. One thing is abundantly clear. The Mid Terms are upon us and the GOP are riding the culture war to try to win it.
If someone says their 5 year old kid is transgender, there's almost certainly sadistic coercion on behalf of the parent who feel it'd help their woke status having a transgender child. So I don't have a problem with it? What? You're telling me 5 year olds know all about gender and sexuality? I bet you also think we should force toy stores by law to only have gender neutral toys on the shelves too.
Puberty blockers for children... it's child abuse. It is using a social construct (the concept you can actually pick and change gender in the first place) to go against the biological processes of the child itself and force their body, through drugs and treatments, to do something the body doesn't want to do. So people like you can pat yourselves on the back and pretend you're doing something good.
not from Texas but this is a very respectable move by Abbott.
Makes me respect him alot.
castration for children should be seen as child abuse as well as putting them on puberty blockers or switching them on to testosterone on female children or estrogen on male children.
I think you have to be pretty sick in the head to want this kind of thing put on children.
While this is a completely separate part of the republican party. Greg Abbott has ordered the Family and Protective Services to investigate ALL transgender children in Texas and prosecuting their parents as child abusers.
While these are NOT the same people and it would be fallacious to link the actions of Greg Abbott to the stuff going on in Florida. One thing is abundantly clear. The Mid Terms are upon us and the GOP are riding the culture war to try to win it.
If someone says their 5 year old kid is transgender, there's almost certainly sadistic coercion on behalf of the parent who feel it'd help their woke status having a transgender child. So I don't have a problem with it? What? You're telling me 5 year olds know all about gender and sexuality? I bet you also think we should force toy stores by law to only have gender neutral toys on the shelves too.
Puberty blockers for children... it's child abuse. It is using a social construct (the concept you can actually pick and change gender in the first place) to go against the biological processes of the child itself and force their body, through drugs and treatments, to do something the body doesn't want to do. So people like you can pat yourselves on the back and pretend you're doing something good.
not from Texas but this is a very respectable move by Abbott.
Makes me respect him alot.
castration for children should be seen as child abuse as well as putting them on puberty blockers or switching them on to testosterone on female children or estrogen on male children.
I think you have to be pretty sick in the head to want this kind of thing put on children.
Yeah, in most cases where this happens, it's because the parent wants a transgendered kid since the extremists on the left and in the media have made it trendy. This involves a parent coercing their child to believe they are, punishing them if they do anything in contradiction to it, and then further abusing them by denying them healthy development into their teens and adulthood by using drugs to stunt their development. It's absolutely disgusting, and those parents should absolutely be doing jail time.
If someone says their 5 year old kid is transgender, there's almost certainly sadistic coercion on behalf of the parent who feel it'd help their woke status having a transgender child. So I don't have a problem with it? What? You're telling me 5 year olds know all about gender and sexuality? I bet you also think we should force toy stores by law to only have gender neutral toys on the shelves too.
Puberty blockers for children... it's child abuse. It is using a social construct (the concept you can actually pick and change gender in the first place) to go against the biological processes of the child itself and force their body, through drugs and treatments, to do something the body doesn't want to do. So people like you can pat yourselves on the back and pretend you're doing something good.
I have to agree with this. This is a mental illness. People who do this crap are sick in the head. This whole gender dysphoria nonsense is a mental illness too.
"the fact of being male or female, especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences, not differences in biology"
What does the second part even mean? It's being male/female, which we just defined as sex, which is defined based on gametes, but especially male/female when considered with references to cultural and social differences? Does it mean that one's "gender identity" somehow has an impact on their sex?
And if you or I can't come to a clear answer here as adults, how is this in any way appropriate in schools?
I'll explain it to ya.
Maybe you heard of the samoan tradition of raising boys to be girls.
Samoan Fa'afafine – or “Fafa” – are men who are raised as females and identify with that gender.
They're molded into that role, behaving female, seen as female, living their lives as female. Because that is what got shoved into their brains. So, technically, a man who is conditioned "brainwashed" into believing he is a woman, is "medically accurately" a woman.
Social and cultural differences... "medically accurate"...
Log in to comment