this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
935 points (96.4% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2485 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A gay doctor who is one of Louisiana’s only specialist paediatric cardiologists has left the state after the introduction of a Don’t Say Gay copycat bill and a ban on gender-affirming care for trans youth.

Jake Kleinmahon, who was one of just three doctors specialising in heart transplants for children in Louisiana, chose to leave the state with his family, as they no longer felt safe.

Kleinmahon met and fell in love with his husband Tom in New Orleans, and the couple expected remain in Louisiana, even after retirement. However, he told CNN that the state’s anti-LGBTQ+ legislation made him and his family feel unwelcome and that he ultimately “didn’t have a choice”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The article doesn't do a good job explaining the "Don't Say Gay" bill. The bill prohibits teachers from teaching about sexual orientation before 4th grade.

Here is an article about that:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/florida-don-t-say-gay-bill-desantis-1.6400087

[–] archiotterpup@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Close, it's you can't even say gay people or kids exist

[–] sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Where did you read that?

[–] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, what it actually says is: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/PDF

To quote from the bill:

  1. 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.

As far as I can tell, the term "classroom instruction" in Florida law means a course designed to be presented to a group of students by a live instructor using lecture, video, webcast, or virtual or other audio-video presentation. There isn't a separate definition given in the "Don't Say Gay" law, and at a glance I couldn't find another definition used in Florida other than the one I just gave, though there might be elsewhere in Florida law, since precise definitions are often central to what exactly is permitted.

[–] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students [...].

This part, even with the "in accordance with state standards," is a big problem. This section doesn't restrict it to kindergarten through 3rd if no manner at all is considered age appropriate.

I also suspect "state standards" can be updated without legislature or without approval from parents.

[–] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I didn't say it was good, but it doesn't say you can't admit gay people exist. I figured linking the actual law we're talking about is probably more useful than running off either sides exaggerations of it.

[–] archiotterpup@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A teacher got fired under the bill for telling her class she had a wife. She would not have been fired if she told them she had a husband. What's your response to that?

[–] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

Can you point me at the case? Because the closest I've been able to find was a Texas teacher fired after referring to a woman as her future wife, and then winning a discrimination suit for $100,000 in damages. Which seems like the system working - bigot did stupid bigot thing, got sued, damages paid out. Also not in Florida, and thus obviously not fired under a Florida law.

There was also a pansexual Florida teacher (she was married to a man) who had students create flags reflecting their sexualities and hung them up in class who was fired, but it's a lot easier to argue that that is "classroom instruction" in an art class and it wasn't merely telling her class she had a wife (not least of which because she doesn't).

And also a married lesbian teacher who resigned because she felt the law would be too restrictive, but she wasn't fired or even challenged by the district or parents regarding her status according to the articles I've read.

My Google-fu may simply be too weak to find the right case.

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Yeah but then how we would take things out of context then? Mindless fabrication of information? Lying? Bollocks I say!

[–] DarthBueller@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I have two words you need to take time to parse: "Chilling Effect." EDIT: It appears you think the bill is bigoted, based on comments elsewhere. You directing people to the language of the bill like the text speaks for itself is usually something that proponents of the legislation do, hence my confusion as to your rhetorical point.

[–] dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Wasn't the bill extended to all grades?

[–] TechyDad@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

That's might have been in Florida, not Louisiana, but it wouldn't surprise me if this happens.

Just like the anti-gender affirming treatment bills that were supposedly only for minors because "we've got to stop kids from making decisions they'll regret." Later, of course, some right wing areas extended those bans to adults, dropping the "protect the children" mask that we were all able to see past anyway.

[–] sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

I never read about that extension, so I'd need a source.