*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 9419
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #100 on: January 28, 2022, 07:01:03 PM »
against their conscious…. against their conscious.

Doctor’s should make decisions based on the best medical science and evidence, not their personal feelings. What if it’s against their personal ethics to let republicans get the best care available. This bill allows that, even though every sane person would say that’s idiotic. If you are following your personal ethics over evidence when evidence is clear then you shouldn’t be a doctor, clearly.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6827
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #101 on: January 28, 2022, 07:10:50 PM »
I want this bill to pass so anti-vaxxers are legally denied care because

"It is unethical to provide care for someone who clearly has no desire to afford themselves protection."
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3019
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #102 on: January 28, 2022, 07:24:52 PM »
Who said Ivermectin was "life saving"? And who said the scenario was an "emergency situation"?

That's the purpose of the case in the link to determine.

The case was thrown out.

Quote from: stack
You didn't answer the question. Who is "forcing" these physicians to do things that go against their conscience?

I'm not aware of any law forcing doctors to do things against their conscience.

So Dr's aren't forced to do things against their conscience. Got it.

The bill upholds their current right to decline from providing services they believe is unethical. Rama Set disagrees with the bill and wants to force doctors to do things which go against their conscience. Can you tell me why he's right and why doctors should be compelled by the law to provide what they believe to be unethical services?

As you stated, there is no law forcing Dr's to do things against their conscience. That being the case, what law (that doesn't exist) are you referring to that compels Drs to do things they believe to be unethical? Why is this bill even necessary? Why do Drs need this law to protect them from a law that doesn't exist?

And are you ok with the bill allowing insurance companies to deny coverage based upon their "conscience"?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 9748
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #103 on: January 30, 2022, 03:23:34 AM »
against their conscious…. against their conscious.

Doctor’s should make decisions based on the best medical science and evidence, not their personal feelings. What if it’s against their personal ethics to let republicans get the best care available. This bill allows that, even though every sane person would say that’s idiotic. If you are following your personal ethics over evidence when evidence is clear then you shouldn’t be a doctor, clearly.

Wow, you are making disparaging assumptions and comments, when you didn't even bother to read much about the bill. The bill does not allow doctors to reject people based on their patient's beliefs:

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2022-01-bill-florida-doctors-ability-based.html

"This bill does not allow a health care provider the right to cancel a patient because of who they are as a person or the beliefs they hold," said the measure's sponsor, Rep. John Snyder, R-Stuart. "It simply gives that provider the ability to decline to perform a specific function or procedure or prescription."

Does it sound like the bill is allowing doctors to reject people based on political beliefs?

I am reminded of the trope of when you point a finger, you have three pointing back to you.

So Dr's aren't forced to do things against their conscience. Got it.

The bill upholds their current right to decline from providing services they believe is unethical. Rama Set disagrees with the bill and wants to force doctors to do things which go against their conscience. Can you tell me why he's right and why doctors should be compelled by the law to provide what they believe to be unethical services?

As you stated, there is no law forcing Dr's to do things against their conscience. That being the case, what law (that doesn't exist) are you referring to that compels Drs to do things they believe to be unethical? Why is this bill even necessary? Why do Drs need this law to protect them from a law that doesn't exist?

And are you ok with the bill allowing insurance companies to deny coverage based upon their "conscience"?

Nowhere have I argued that there is a law forcing doctors to do things against their conscience. You are making up arguments.

The bill upholds the right of doctors to decline to make prescriptions which goes against their conscience. I think that it's a good bill.

Please let us know why it is a bad bill and why doctors should be forced to make prescriptions they think are unethical.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2022, 04:02:38 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 9419
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #104 on: January 30, 2022, 04:17:16 AM »
Wow, you are making disparaging assumptions and comments, when you didn't even bother to read much about the bill. The bill does not allow doctors to reject people based on their patient's beliefs:

It absolutely does.  You've already admitted as much.  You have done it in this exact post:

The bill upholds their current right to decline from providing services they believe is unethical.

Quote
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2022-01-bill-florida-doctors-ability-based.html

"This bill does not allow a health care provider the right to cancel a patient because of who they are as a person or the beliefs they hold," said the measure's sponsor, Rep. John Snyder, R-Stuart. "It simply gives that provider the ability to decline to perform a specific function or procedure or prescription."

Does it sound like the bill is allowing doctors to reject people based on political beliefs?

Yes.  Yes it does.

How does, "It simply gives that provider the ability to decline to perform a specific function or procedure or prescription." address whether or not a doctor can deny service based on their ethical beliefs?  It doesn't

Quote
I am reminded of the trope of when you point a finger, you have three pointing back to you.

Ok boomer.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3019
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #105 on: January 30, 2022, 05:40:06 AM »
So Dr's aren't forced to do things against their conscience. Got it.

The bill upholds their current right to decline from providing services they believe is unethical. Rama Set disagrees with the bill and wants to force doctors to do things which go against their conscience. Can you tell me why he's right and why doctors should be compelled by the law to provide what they believe to be unethical services?

As you stated, there is no law forcing Dr's to do things against their conscience. That being the case, what law (that doesn't exist) are you referring to that compels Drs to do things they believe to be unethical? Why is this bill even necessary? Why do Drs need this law to protect them from a law that doesn't exist?

And are you ok with the bill allowing insurance companies to deny coverage based upon their "conscience"?

Nowhere have I argued that there is a law forcing doctors to do things against their conscience. You are making up arguments.

The bill upholds the right of doctors to decline to make prescriptions which goes against their conscience. I think that it's a good bill.

Please let us know why it is a bad bill and why doctors should be forced to make prescriptions they think are unethical.

Who is currently forcing Drs to make prescriptions they think are unethical? The only thing I’ve seen is patients suing hospitals for not giving Covid patients ivermectin. I guess the view is that it is against the conscience, unethical, to prescribe a drug that hasn’t been shown to work. So this bill would prevent these ivermectin suits and such.

Why is it bad? Because it’s way too broad and ambiguous. Even in the article you cited, R’s & D’s both acknowledged that this is very subjective:

"Would you agree or disagree that morality and ethics can be subjective? That everyone can define their own morals and ethics?" Rep. Anna Eskamani, D-Orlando, asked Snyder at one point.

"... Yes, it is subjective," Snyder said. "There is no debating that."


That seems really dangerous. For instance would you be ok if a dr refused to treat your non-emergency Covid infection symptoms based upon his/her conscience that it is unethical in their belief for you to be unvaxxed?

And you never addressed this: Are you ok with the bill allowing insurance companies to deny coverage based upon their "conscience"?

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1734
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #106 on: March 10, 2022, 09:28:43 PM »

So, this applies to pre-K through 3 grade.
Some people like 'em real young round these parts.
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3019
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #107 on: March 10, 2022, 10:03:42 PM »
So, this applies to pre-K through 3 grade.
Some people like 'em real young round these parts.

I think where people are taking issue is the broader part. The bill states:

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.

It's this bit: "...or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards." No one seems to know what this means and what the latitude is.

I guess another part is is this bill necessary? I can't seem to find out out why it even exists. Something about parents should be able to choose what their kids learn in school? I'm not sure how this would even come up as a discussion with K-3. Maybe a teacher says to his/her 2nd grade class, "Make sure to have your Mom & Dad come to the play you are all in this evening..." Little Timmy says, "I have two Dads, can they come?" Discussion of sexual orientation ensues?

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1734
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #108 on: March 11, 2022, 12:41:21 AM »
So, this applies to pre-K through 3 grade.
Some people like 'em real young round these parts.

I think where people are taking issue is the broader part. The bill states:

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.

It's this bit: "...or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards." No one seems to know what this means and what the latitude is.

I guess another part is is this bill necessary? I can't seem to find out out why it even exists. Something about parents should be able to choose what their kids learn in school? I'm not sure how this would even come up as a discussion with K-3. Maybe a teacher says to his/her 2nd grade class, "Make sure to have your Mom & Dad come to the play you are all in this evening..." Little Timmy says, "I have two Dads, can they come?" Discussion of sexual orientation ensues?
Do you want anyone other than you, as a parent, talking to your children about sexual orientation or gender issues when they are pre-K through 3rd grade age?

You are aware of developmental milestones of a human as they progress toward maturation?

I guess if educators are not smart enough to figure out what that language means, it sort of calls into question why they are teaching in the first place, uh?
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

*

Offline Iceman

  • *
  • Posts: 1730
  • where there's smoke there's wires
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #109 on: March 11, 2022, 01:26:49 AM »
As a parent, I want kids to have access to ask difficult questions, or things they don’t feel comfortable about with their parents, to other qualified people they trust.

I hope my kids feel comfortable enough to ask me anything once they get to an age when questions start to come up. But if they don’t, I want there to be someone trustworthy, and accessible to them.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3019
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #110 on: March 11, 2022, 02:14:06 AM »
So, this applies to pre-K through 3 grade.
Some people like 'em real young round these parts.

I think where people are taking issue is the broader part. The bill states:

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.

It's this bit: "...or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards." No one seems to know what this means and what the latitude is.

I guess another part is is this bill necessary? I can't seem to find out out why it even exists. Something about parents should be able to choose what their kids learn in school? I'm not sure how this would even come up as a discussion with K-3. Maybe a teacher says to his/her 2nd grade class, "Make sure to have your Mom & Dad come to the play you are all in this evening..." Little Timmy says, "I have two Dads, can they come?" Discussion of sexual orientation ensues?
Do you want anyone other than you, as a parent, talking to your children about sexual orientation or gender issues when they are pre-K through 3rd grade age?

You are aware of developmental milestones of a human as they progress toward maturation?

I guess if educators are not smart enough to figure out what that language means, it sort of calls into question why they are teaching in the first place, uh?

All I'm conveying is:

A) What does "...in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards" mean?
B) Is any of this really an issue that government needs to create laws, mandates, and penalties around? Is there actually an issue around Teachers talking about sexual orientation to K-3 kids? As in, does it happen?

For someone who is anti-goverment reach, let alone overreach, I'm surprised you've sided with government so decidely.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6827
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #111 on: March 11, 2022, 05:31:01 AM »
So, this applies to pre-K through 3 grade.
Some people like 'em real young round these parts.

I think where people are taking issue is the broader part. The bill states:

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.

It's this bit: "...or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards." No one seems to know what this means and what the latitude is.

I guess another part is is this bill necessary? I can't seem to find out out why it even exists. Something about parents should be able to choose what their kids learn in school? I'm not sure how this would even come up as a discussion with K-3. Maybe a teacher says to his/her 2nd grade class, "Make sure to have your Mom & Dad come to the play you are all in this evening..." Little Timmy says, "I have two Dads, can they come?" Discussion of sexual orientation ensues?
Do you want anyone other than you, as a parent, talking to your children about sexual orientation or gender issues when they are pre-K through 3rd grade age?

You are aware of developmental milestones of a human as they progress toward maturation?

I guess if educators are not smart enough to figure out what that language means, it sort of calls into question why they are teaching in the first place, uh?

My kids' daycare has already spoken to my children in an age appropriate manner. (My son years ago, my daughter last year)

But Stack's question is sound: what is age or develomply appropriate according to state standards?  What are the state standards?  Do you know?

Because in theory this law also requires that they teach about lesbian sex, if the standards say so, rather than letting teachers and schools determine what is appropriate.


Also, back when I was in school (and my kids now) I got an option to opt out of such education.  I'm pretty sure this still exists in florida.
You know, for the parents who need to impart a "God hates fags" mentality in their 5 year old.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1734
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #112 on: March 11, 2022, 11:13:18 AM »
All I'm conveying is:

A) What does "...in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards" mean?
All I'm conveying is: Ask the educators who should be able to clearly spell out what the language means and what the adverse affect will be due to the law being in place.
B) Is any of this really an issue that government needs to create laws, mandates, and penalties around? Is there actually an issue around Teachers talking about sexual orientation to K-3 kids? As in, does it happen?
Obviously, it does...not that you would ever acknowledge it.
For someone who is anti-goverment reach, let alone overreach, I'm surprised you've sided with government so decidely.
Casting this issue in terms of "overreach," is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

You are all in favor of DEMOCRATIC RULE except when the pedophiles you champion get left out in the cold.

Don't worry, Uncle Hairy Legs will ride in, just as soon as he finishes off Corn Pop, and make all things well again, while ringing the ice cream bell.
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3019
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #113 on: March 11, 2022, 09:46:43 PM »
All I'm conveying is:

A) What does "...in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards" mean?
All I'm conveying is: Ask the educators who should be able to clearly spell out what the language means and what the adverse affect will be due to the law being in place.

A good friend of mine is a 2nd grade teacher in a town outside of Boston. I'll ask her.

B) Is any of this really an issue that government needs to create laws, mandates, and penalties around? Is there actually an issue around Teachers talking about sexual orientation to K-3 kids? As in, does it happen?
Obviously, it does...not that you would ever acknowledge it.
For someone who is anti-goverment reach, let alone overreach, I'm surprised you've sided with government so decidely.
Casting this issue in terms of "overreach," is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

You are all in favor of DEMOCRATIC RULE except when the pedophiles you champion get left out in the cold.

Don't worry, Uncle Hairy Legs will ride in, just as soon as he finishes off Corn Pop, and make all things well again, while ringing the ice cream bell.

I didn't mean to say that this particular law is "overreach", per se. Just that the vaguery around, "...in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards", gives me pause in terms of reach.

I'm not sure how you got all the way to "pedophiles you champion". But to be expected I guess considering how overblown, bombastic, threatened, and hyperbolic you seem to be.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1734
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #114 on: March 12, 2022, 11:23:35 PM »
All I'm conveying is:

A) What does "...in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards" mean?
All I'm conveying is: Ask the educators who should be able to clearly spell out what the language means and what the adverse affect will be due to the law being in place.

A good friend of mine is a 2nd grade teacher in a town outside of Boston. I'll ask her.
Asking her would be illogical. One, she's in Boston, unaffected whatsoever by the law in FL. B, if she was in FL, she would be concerned with the first part that deals with pre-K through 3rd grade.
B) Is any of this really an issue that government needs to create laws, mandates, and penalties around? Is there actually an issue around Teachers talking about sexual orientation to K-3 kids? As in, does it happen?
Obviously, it does...not that you would ever acknowledge it.
For someone who is anti-goverment reach, let alone overreach, I'm surprised you've sided with government so decidely.
Casting this issue in terms of "overreach," is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

You are all in favor of DEMOCRATIC RULE except when the pedophiles you champion get left out in the cold.

Don't worry, Uncle Hairy Legs will ride in, just as soon as he finishes off Corn Pop, and make all things well again, while ringing the ice cream bell.

I didn't mean to say that this particular law is "overreach", per se. Just that the vaguery around, "...in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards", gives me pause in terms of reach.

I'm not sure how you got all the way to "pedophiles you champion". But to be expected I guess considering how overblown, bombastic, threatened, and hyperbolic you seem to be.
There are clear developmental milestones educators rely upon when it comes to the introduction of instructional material and social interaction/activities.

You know this and shows your just whistling dixie in your typical fashion.
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6827
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #115 on: March 12, 2022, 11:45:20 PM »
There are clear developmental milestones educators rely upon when it comes to the introduction of instructional material and social interaction/activities.

You know this and shows your just whistling dixie in your typical fashion.
You are correct.
None of which involves teaching about different genders or relationships along a line rather than a binary system.

At least, not the American system.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3019
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #116 on: March 13, 2022, 02:55:10 AM »
All I'm conveying is:

A) What does "...in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards" mean?
All I'm conveying is: Ask the educators who should be able to clearly spell out what the language means and what the adverse affect will be due to the law being in place.

A good friend of mine is a 2nd grade teacher in a town outside of Boston. I'll ask her.
Asking her would be illogical. One, she's in Boston, unaffected whatsoever by the law in FL. B, if she was in FL, she would be concerned with the first part that deals with pre-K through 3rd grade.
B) Is any of this really an issue that government needs to create laws, mandates, and penalties around? Is there actually an issue around Teachers talking about sexual orientation to K-3 kids? As in, does it happen?
Obviously, it does...not that you would ever acknowledge it.
For someone who is anti-goverment reach, let alone overreach, I'm surprised you've sided with government so decidely.
Casting this issue in terms of "overreach," is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

You are all in favor of DEMOCRATIC RULE except when the pedophiles you champion get left out in the cold.

Don't worry, Uncle Hairy Legs will ride in, just as soon as he finishes off Corn Pop, and make all things well again, while ringing the ice cream bell.

I didn't mean to say that this particular law is "overreach", per se. Just that the vaguery around, "...in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards", gives me pause in terms of reach.

I'm not sure how you got all the way to "pedophiles you champion". But to be expected I guess considering how overblown, bombastic, threatened, and hyperbolic you seem to be.
There are clear developmental milestones educators rely upon when it comes to the introduction of instructional material and social interaction/activities.

You know this and shows your just whistling dixie in your typical fashion.

I did ask her. She thinks the whole thing is pretty pointless - Stuff like that just doesn't come up, for her anyway, in the 2nd grade. She's been a 1st & 2nd grade teacher for 18 years - Granted, sample size of one.

As for the second bit, she says that these, "developmental milestones educators rely upon" you refer to actually vary from state to state. So, to your point, MA might be different than FLA. She also said there's nothing in the MA version that addresses anything in the FLA bill. So what would be interesting would be to see what exactly "...in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards" means in FLA.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1734
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #117 on: March 13, 2022, 08:19:18 AM »
There are clear developmental milestones educators rely upon when it comes to the introduction of instructional material and social interaction/activities.

You know this and shows your just whistling dixie in your typical fashion.
You are correct.
None of which involves teaching about different genders or relationships along a line rather than a binary system.

At least, not the American system.
Holy crap, now claiming sex education classes have no defined starting point in public school.

You just wrote a flat-out lie.

Wtf is the matter with you?
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1734
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #118 on: March 13, 2022, 08:29:37 AM »
All I'm conveying is:

A) What does "...in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards" mean?
All I'm conveying is: Ask the educators who should be able to clearly spell out what the language means and what the adverse affect will be due to the law being in place.

A good friend of mine is a 2nd grade teacher in a town outside of Boston. I'll ask her.
Asking her would be illogical. One, she's in Boston, unaffected whatsoever by the law in FL. B, if she was in FL, she would be concerned with the first part that deals with pre-K through 3rd grade.
B) Is any of this really an issue that government needs to create laws, mandates, and penalties around? Is there actually an issue around Teachers talking about sexual orientation to K-3 kids? As in, does it happen?
Obviously, it does...not that you would ever acknowledge it.
For someone who is anti-goverment reach, let alone overreach, I'm surprised you've sided with government so decidely.
Casting this issue in terms of "overreach," is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

You are all in favor of DEMOCRATIC RULE except when the pedophiles you champion get left out in the cold.

Don't worry, Uncle Hairy Legs will ride in, just as soon as he finishes off Corn Pop, and make all things well again, while ringing the ice cream bell.

I didn't mean to say that this particular law is "overreach", per se. Just that the vaguery around, "...in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards", gives me pause in terms of reach.

I'm not sure how you got all the way to "pedophiles you champion". But to be expected I guess considering how overblown, bombastic, threatened, and hyperbolic you seem to be.
There are clear developmental milestones educators rely upon when it comes to the introduction of instructional material and social interaction/activities.

You know this and shows your just whistling dixie in your typical fashion.

I did ask her. She thinks the whole thing is pretty pointless - Stuff like that just doesn't come up, for her anyway, in the 2nd grade. She's been a 1st & 2nd grade teacher for 18 years - Granted, sample size of one.
You should find more logical friends.

As for the second bit, she says that these, "developmental milestones educators rely upon" you refer to actually vary from state to state. So, to your point, MA might be different than FLA. She also said there's nothing in the MA version that addresses anything in the FLA bill. So what would be interesting would be to see what exactly "...in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards" means in FLA.

The bottom line is this:

You and LD and many others here have a general opinion US public schools have a way to go in terms of performance.

Teachers of pre-K through 3rd grade talking about gender identity doesn't fit with a model of improvement.

https://unitedforflchildren.com/research/common-core-state-standards/developmentally-appropriate-practice-and-the-florida-standards/
It's so hard to have faith in humanity when they do shit like this.

"I hate the police so I'm gonna burn a Walgreen's!"

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6827
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« Reply #119 on: March 13, 2022, 08:48:31 AM »
There are clear developmental milestones educators rely upon when it comes to the introduction of instructional material and social interaction/activities.

You know this and shows your just whistling dixie in your typical fashion.
You are correct.
None of which involves teaching about different genders or relationships along a line rather than a binary system.

At least, not the American system.
Holy crap, now claiming sex education classes have no defined starting point in public school.

You just wrote a flat-out lie.

Wtf is the matter with you?

???
What are you talking about?  I never mentioned sex education classes.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.