Florida’s “Don’t say gay” law

Post Reply New Topic

Agreed.

For the record, I have very liberal views about sexuality.
Presumably, views that Desantis wouldn't agree with.

But there is a bigger consideration.
The organic development of an individual (as far as possible) and the discouragement of those who would put their political self-interests in front of that of the child.

I am not a fan of Hitlerian indoctrination in the skooling system.

Last edited by Pepe on 14 Mar 2022, 7:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

https://www.npr.org/2021/06/09/10046296 ... x-marriage

It seems that, at least in the U.S., the validity of gay relationships is pretty much "common knowledge" now.

And a 4 year old would be aware of this through genetic memory?

WTF does that even mean? Do 4 year olds "genetically" (???) know how to tie their shoes, add and subtract, or properly wash their hands? I guess we can't teach kids about those things because they dont just automatically, magically develop knowledge of them.

People are sometimes born with a predisposition towards being gay.

You missed my point.

I'm not into "actively teaching about gay lifestyles" or whatever.

But if a kid happens to run into a "two daddies" sort of situation, it has to be explained somehow. At four years of age, though, I certainly wouldn't emphasize the "sexual aspect." Nor even at much older ages.

70% is not anywhere close to 100%

It says its a "record number", meaning that other years it was less than that

And then there are also other countries where it is definitely less than that

Now contrast it with mathematics. No country or culture would deny mathematics. Thats why schools should teach math and not politics.

If they want to teach politics, then the only "undeniable truth" about politics would be that there are multiple schools of thoughts. So then they can go ahead and teach "this school of thought says this, that other school of thought says that other thing". That's neutral. But they can't take their own stance.

Indeed, instructors should present ideas dispassionately.

However, I don't believe "intelligent design," say, should be taught alongside "evolution." There is overwhelming evidence for "evolution"---but "intelligent design" is based on religious faith.

Children in kindergarten "should" focus on the 3R's rather than the existence of political philosophies, imo.
The suggestion here in Australia, by some, is that the politicisation of the skooling system is responsible for the very poor academic performance.
Australia has gone down the tube in recent decades.

Some people might disagree with this statement.

--- Intelligence design is based on "common sense" argument that biological systems couldn't just compile together by accident.

--- Evolution is based on "common sense" conclusion one obtains by looking at archaeology

So if you look at it this way it is a bit of a paradox. Similar to quantum mechanics and gravity both of which are supported by strong evidence yet seemingly contradicting each other.

And besides, like mentioned: no matter how strongly the teacher believes in something, if a large portion of population disagrees then its no longer a fact.

I think creation and evolution should be taught side by side, both presented as "just a theory".

I see your point that you shouldn't indoctrinate kids. What if their parents are of a different religion or atheists? The way around it is something along the following lines. Sometimes in history class they teach the conflict between Luther and Catholic church and tell students what each side believed. The teachers is not indoctrinating students while they do that, because they are not telling students that those things are true, they are just saying those are the things some historical figures believed. With creation and evolution it can be something along those lines, except that "historic figures" are the current rather than the past.

Kids in Kindergarten here are not taught "philosophical philosophies." They are taught the "3 R's."

They are taught very basic science, civics, and encouraged to know their address and phone number.

Religion is taught to children these days to primarily give them a sense of comfort, imo.
Later on, when they are more intellectually capable of coping, the horrors of our existence can be tackled better.

"The Garden of Eden" is a metaphor for the childish state of mind.
The discovery of sexuality casts them out of that naive paradise.
Some continue to clutch onto the fantasy of a benevolent creator, however.
C'est la vie.

I have seen some shocking examples of teacher activists attempting to brainwash impressionable children.
Presumably, you haven't.

I really should start a thread on this.

Yeah, that is a valid point too.

I was just saying how they would have to do it *IF* they were to include politics. But *whether or not* to include it is yet another topic.

I tend to see it both ways. On the one hand I don't think its a good idea when education is limitted to A, B and C and nothing outside of it. The more people know the better. But on the other hand I also see how politics can disract people. Its one thing to expand on mathematics or science outside of curriculum, and its quite another thing to get disracted by politics.

Well, I don't think they are taught evolution in kindergarden anyway. When we talk about evolution we are talking about high school. And in high school they "are" taught philosophies such as Luther vs Catholic church, etc. So might as well add creation.