Archy1221
Well-known member
Just to clarify for everyone, I didn’t make up anything as funhusker falsely eludes. I shared a meme attached to video clip. The meme doesn’t reference any sexual preferences.
Just normal American Utopia...
- Thread starter funhusker
- Start date
funhusker
Active member
But you did, albeit sarcastically.
However, you did push a false narrative. Very similar to what you keep complaining about.
But I’m not worried about any of that. I just wanted to explain why I didn’t think Buttigieg was out of line by saying what he did.
Last edited by a moderator:
Guy Chamberlin
Well-known member
I'm a little late to this thread, but wow. Your futher explanation only makes it worse.
The uhm "choice" to live as a heterosexual when you are in fact homosexual is based on the historical treatment of gays, which typically involved humiliation, banishment, loss of job, physical violence, and even death. That's not "choosing" your sexuality. It's choosing to avoid consequences brought on by people who think you are choosing to do something God abhors.
You and Teach appear to have mixed up asexuality with Incels. If you don't know about the Incel community, look it up. Or don't. It's both comical and scary. The idea that some people would be born without, or lose a chemical sex drive should surprise no one.
A few years ago the analogy was made that homosexuality is a lot like left-handedness: it appears in about 8-10% of the population, and has done so throughout history and races and cultures. As a minority, society makes it a little more difficult to be left-handed, but we generally find work-arounds as no one blames someone for being left-handed. If you can throw a decent slider left-handed, you might even be rewarded with a big MLB contract.
Archy1221
Well-known member
Archy1221
Well-known member
Archy1221
Well-known member
Guy Chamberlin
Well-known member
It pertains directly to the post you made. The one I cited. That's how these things work.
Archy1221
Well-known member
Ok, then pleas explain correctly how my post makes “things worse”. I mean it’s absolutely true that being vast majority of people living a homosexual were born that way, and it’s also true that a small minority of people were not born that way and for whatever reason have chosen to be with their same sex. That’s quite different than incel. Surprised you don’t know this.
funhusker
Active member
That this law only keeps k-3 graders from learning about sex.
It doesn’t do that at all.
Actually Mr Smith can still show a 1st grader how to put a condom on a banana if it’s in the curriculum. He just can’t talk about how some people have two dads.
funhusker
Active member
Last edited by a moderator:
Archy1221
Well-known member
I did. thanks for advice I didn’t need. Seems you need a refresher read. IMO, you seem really triggered about k-3rd not getting a sex education at school in Florida :dunno
funhusker
Active member
Where are you getting the impression that this law bans “sex education” or the discussion of sex in k-3rd?
This is a serious question.
This law does not ban discussion of sex. I’ve mentioned before that I would actually be okay with it if it actually did.
edit: I’ve actually read the thing like 5 times today just to see if I’m missing something. What part are you referencing when you say it bans talking about sex or sex Ed?
Last edited by a moderator:
Archy1221
Well-known member
Section 5/6 specifically 6. In our school district, well being education encompasses sex education. My assumption is it’s the same in Florida. If it’s not, I’m wrong. If it is, then I guess that’s where parents get to to choose whether or not they those discussions are appropriate for their kid. It disallows Mr. Smith from teaching how to put a condom on a banana to anyone who thinks that’s bulls#!t (even if was in some fairy tail 1st grade curriculum that it will never be in).
If I used ban in earlier posts in the wrong context (I’ll try and go back to look) explaining my position in haste then that’s on me, but it doesn’t really change what my position is in that kids k-3 don’t need to be taught sex education in school and this seems to codify a parents ability to “ban” that from happening for their child.
funhusker
Active member
You may want to reread those sections. They’re about health screenings and services. Not health education.
5. At the beginning of the school year, each school
107 district shall notify parents of each healthcare service offered
108 at their student's school and the option to withhold consent or
109 decline any specific service. Parental consent to a health care
110 service does not waive the parent's right to access his or her
111 student's educational or health records or to be notified about
112 a change in his or her student's services or monitoring as
113 provided by this paragraph.
114 6. Before administering a student well-being questionnaire
115 or health screening form to a student in kindergarten through
116 grade 3, the school district must provide the questionnaire or
117 health screening form to the parent and obtain the permission of
118 the parent.
and you’re correct that no one is teaching condoms to first graders. It is crazy to think sex is being taught in k-3.
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc
Active member
I knew a guy who could draw anything. Pen to paper, swish-swish, boom. Cityscape, caricature, fruit in a bowl, whatever. If he saw it in his head he could ink it on paper.
I once expressed amazement at his talent. He poo-pooed that, saying if I just tried, I could do it too. It's not that hard. Here's the pen I like. Here's the paper pad I use. Get these, practice, and you can do this too.
But that's not true. Talent is talent, and everyone doesn't have the same talent. It's easy to you because that's your talent. I could maybe muddle through the basicest parts of your job, but I couldn't actually factually engineer my way out of a wet paper aerospace bag. Most of us here on the HuskerBoard couldn't.