This post has been de-listed
It is no longer included in search results and normal feeds (front page, hot posts, subreddit posts, etc). It remains visible only via the author's post history.
Assuming a child has a a caretaker/s is common sense.
Well you obviously don't have any kids.
5 years old is kindergarten. You learn your ABC's in kindergarten. It's hard to read when you don't know the alphabet.
This bill doesn't stop children from talking to each other in any way it also bans no books. 5 year olds can't read......
Why do you assume a child has a mother and a father? Some a parent possibly 2 some have a caretaker. Yet again why are you having the conversation with the child in the first place?
Subreddit
Post Details
- Posted
- 2 years ago
- Reddit URL
- View post on reddit.com
- External URL
- i.redd.it/dbwobj4dl7l81....
I went and read the actual bill.
"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 "
Unless I missed something I still don't understand how this is problematic.
This is one of those things that is being twisted by the media. It's not anti gay it's anti sexualization of children.
This is what the bill actually says
"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 "
I honestly don't see how people can see this as problematic. these are 5 to 8 year old children these topics should be handled by parents at that age.