Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids from heterosexual families get to see their situation reflected in books in school and read about families like their own in books in school but kids with same sex parents are not allowed to do this?

Because the former is normal and the latter is not. And, look, I support gay marriage, detest the hateful discrimination to which gay people are subjected, and think we have a lot of work to do overcoming our historical prejudices. But that's the reason. And I think you know that.

[…]

Out and proud with your bigotry.

+1 Just, saying it - gay people aren't normal. Here that coworkers, friends, relatives? Here that kid who's trying to figure out who they are and how they fit into this complicated world? You're not normal and so you have to be kept hidden, and you will be sued and fired if you aren't back in the ol closet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids from heterosexual families get to see their situation reflected in books in school and read about families like their own in books in school but kids with same sex parents are not allowed to do this?

Because the former is normal and the latter is not. And, look, I support gay marriage, detest the hateful discrimination to which gay people are subjected, and think we have a lot of work to do overcoming our historical prejudices. But that's the reason. And I think you know that.

[…]

Out and proud with your bigotry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids from heterosexual families get to see their situation reflected in books in school and read about families like their own in books in school but kids with same sex parents are not allowed to do this?

Because the former is normal and the latter is not. And, look, I support gay marriage, detest the hateful discrimination to which gay people are subjected, and think we have a lot of work to do overcoming our historical prejudices. But that's the reason. And I think you know that.

[…]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Letter to the editor in today's Tampa Bay Times:

https://www.tampabay.com/opinion/2022/04/23/to-be-fair-shouldnt-the-villages-also-lose-its-special-district-status-letters/?itm_source=parsely-api

Please help me understand why our governor and Republican state legislators cannot find the time to address the needs of everyday taxpayers in this state. Instead of seeking ways to increase health care for the uninsured, reduce skyrocketing rents for soon-to-be homeless Floridians and address property insurance costs, they are busy attacking Disney and creating voting districts that favor their base. Yes, they are holding yet another special session in May (at taxpayers’ expense) to talk about property insurance, but where were these concerns in the regular legislative session. I suspect they were buried under the scripts of political theater designed to feature the governor. I guess I should be thankful that when I am homeless and uninsured at least I do not have to worry about textbooks in schools that might talk about the economic and racial divide in Florida or that teachers might accidentally launch into a sex education class in kindergarten. That is a solution looking for a problem.

Robin Frank, Tampa

I live in Florida and I am telling you, this is playing poorly here. We have actual needs that the legislature is just flat out ignoring in order to pursue these idiotic, harmful culture war bs battles.

Hopefully voters wake up and realize what the GOP brings to the table. They are only capable of hate and division.

Here's hoping. I don't love either person challenging DeSantis to be governor this time but - Jesus, I would take anything over this freak show. I know there are a lot of people who feel like I do, I just don't know if there's enough of us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Letter to the editor in today's Tampa Bay Times:

https://www.tampabay.com/opinion/2022/04/23/to-be-fair-shouldnt-the-villages-also-lose-its-special-district-status-letters/?itm_source=parsely-api

Please help me understand why our governor and Republican state legislators cannot find the time to address the needs of everyday taxpayers in this state. Instead of seeking ways to increase health care for the uninsured, reduce skyrocketing rents for soon-to-be homeless Floridians and address property insurance costs, they are busy attacking Disney and creating voting districts that favor their base. Yes, they are holding yet another special session in May (at taxpayers’ expense) to talk about property insurance, but where were these concerns in the regular legislative session. I suspect they were buried under the scripts of political theater designed to feature the governor. I guess I should be thankful that when I am homeless and uninsured at least I do not have to worry about textbooks in schools that might talk about the economic and racial divide in Florida or that teachers might accidentally launch into a sex education class in kindergarten. That is a solution looking for a problem.

Robin Frank, Tampa

Purple hair and sodomy aren’t a freak show? This is why Hispanics are flocking to Trump. Just sayin..

I live in Florida and I am telling you, this is playing poorly here. We have actual needs that the legislature is just flat out ignoring in order to pursue these idiotic, harmful culture war bs battles.

Hopefully voters wake up and realize what the GOP brings to the table. They are only capable of hate and division.

Here's hoping. I don't love either person challenging DeSantis to be governor this time but - Jesus, I would take anything over this freak show. I know there are a lot of people who feel like I do, I just don't know if there's enough of us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids from heterosexual families get to see their situation reflected in books in school and read about families like their own in books in school but kids with same sex parents are not allowed to do this?

Because the former is normal and the latter is not. And, look, I support gay marriage, detest the hateful discrimination to which gay people are subjected, and think we have a lot of work to do overcoming our historical prejudices. But that's the reason. And I think you know that.

I think your real question is why should we give heterosexual relationships preferential treatment. I think people advocating for that kind of preferential treatment would be able to advance some non-crazy arguments having to do with the value of heterosexual relationships in both producing children and giving them a stable environment to grow up. Maybe couple that with the idea that you teach the kids about the rules before you teach them about the exception to the rules. E.g. you give them a grasp of Newtonian physics before bending their minds with Einstein's stuff. But, of course, the non-crazy arguments are hopelessly tied up with a bunch of homophobic cultural baggage. So, the argument would probably devolve into name calling and finger pointing pretty quickly.

I think you need to get out more. A certain percentage of the human population is gay and always has been and always will be. Not abnormal at all.

Depends what you mean by "normal." If you mean good, non-scary people that we should treat with dignity, love, and respect, then I totally agree. But if we're talking more in the sense of "statistically mainstream," then no.

Statistically mainstream? What are you talking about? Rights are not given to statistically mainstream people whatever that is supposed to mean. My kid is unusually tall...outside of statistically main stream....and if you think you are denying any rights to him because of that, think again.

We're not talking about denying rights. We're talking about what situations should be reflected in school books. And, just to be perfectly clear, I would not lose a moment of sleep if kindergarten story books have gay couples in them. But the OP of this thread asked why children of heterosexual parents get to see their situation reflected in school books, and I was providing an answer. To take your example of an unusually tall person, we design buildings, cars, airplane seats, and a whole lot of things based on a certain range of heights. Society at large does not have an obligation to design itself around every possible permutation of human life. Where to draw the line is always going to be a question. Do we accommodate every 1 in 7 billion situation? No. Should we accommodate the 1 in 3 situation? Probably. The line is going to be somewhere in between - and the decision about how far to go is going to depend on what kind of burden is presented by accommodating the edge case. (And the decision is going to be complicated by people complaining of undue burden when their real reason has more to do with hateful prejudices.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids from heterosexual families get to see their situation reflected in books in school and read about families like their own in books in school but kids with same sex parents are not allowed to do this?

Because the former is normal and the latter is not. And, look, I support gay marriage, detest the hateful discrimination to which gay people are subjected, and think we have a lot of work to do overcoming our historical prejudices. But that's the reason. And I think you know that.

I think your real question is why should we give heterosexual relationships preferential treatment. I think people advocating for that kind of preferential treatment would be able to advance some non-crazy arguments having to do with the value of heterosexual relationships in both producing children and giving them a stable environment to grow up. Maybe couple that with the idea that you teach the kids about the rules before you teach them about the exception to the rules. E.g. you give them a grasp of Newtonian physics before bending their minds with Einstein's stuff. But, of course, the non-crazy arguments are hopelessly tied up with a bunch of homophobic cultural baggage. So, the argument would probably devolve into name calling and finger pointing pretty quickly.

I think you need to get out more. A certain percentage of the human population is gay and always has been and always will be. Not abnormal at all.

Depends what you mean by "normal." If you mean good, non-scary people that we should treat with dignity, love, and respect, then I totally agree. But if we're talking more in the sense of "statistically mainstream," then no.

Statistically mainstream? What are you talking about? Rights are not given to statistically mainstream people whatever that is supposed to mean. My kid is unusually tall...outside of statistically main stream....and if you think you are denying any rights to him because of that, think again.

We're not talking about denying rights. We're talking about what situations should be reflected in school books. And, just to be perfectly clear, I would not lose a moment of sleep if kindergarten story books have gay couples in them. But the OP of this thread asked why children of heterosexual parents get to see their situation reflected in school books, and I was providing an answer. To take your example of an unusually tall person, we design buildings, cars, airplane seats, and a whole lot of things based on a certain range of heights. Society at large does not have an obligation to design itself around every possible permutation of human life. Where to draw the line is always going to be a question. Do we accommodate every 1 in 7 billion situation? No. Should we accommodate the 1 in 3 situation? Probably. The line is going to be somewhere in between - and the decision about how far to go is going to depend on what kind of burden is presented by accommodating the edge case. (And the decision is going to be complicated by people complaining of undue burden when their real reason has more to do with hateful prejudices.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Letter to the editor in today's Tampa Bay Times:

https://www.tampabay.com/opinion/2022/04/23/to-be-fair-shouldnt-the-villages-also-lose-its-special-district-status-letters/?itm_source=parsely-api

Please help me understand why our governor and Republican state legislators cannot find the time to address the needs of everyday taxpayers in this state. Instead of seeking ways to increase health care for the uninsured, reduce skyrocketing rents for soon-to-be homeless Floridians and address property insurance costs, they are busy attacking Disney and creating voting districts that favor their base. Yes, they are holding yet another special session in May (at taxpayers’ expense) to talk about property insurance, but where were these concerns in the regular legislative session. I suspect they were buried under the scripts of political theater designed to feature the governor. I guess I should be thankful that when I am homeless and uninsured at least I do not have to worry about textbooks in schools that might talk about the economic and racial divide in Florida or that teachers might accidentally launch into a sex education class in kindergarten. That is a solution looking for a problem.

Robin Frank, Tampa

I live in Florida and I am telling you, this is playing poorly here. We have actual needs that the legislature is just flat out ignoring in order to pursue these idiotic, harmful culture war bs battles.

Hopefully voters wake up and realize what the GOP brings to the table. They are only capable of hate and division.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids from heterosexual families get to see their situation reflected in books in school and read about families like their own in books in school but kids with same sex parents are not allowed to do this?

That's the rub isn't it?? Based on these laws there should be no talk of any type of coupling whether hetero or homosexual.
No one should discuss gender roles for their traditional or not.
I just hope that they actually follow this law and remove all books and materials that include anything about hetero sexual relationships as well.

Anonymous wrote:Letter to the editor in today's Tampa Bay Times:

https://www.tampabay.com/opinion/2022/04/23/to-be-fair-shouldnt-the-villages-also-lose-its-special-district-status-letters/?itm_source=parsely-api

Please help me understand why our governor and Republican state legislators cannot find the time to address the needs of everyday taxpayers in this state. Instead of seeking ways to increase health care for the uninsured, reduce skyrocketing rents for soon-to-be homeless Floridians and address property insurance costs, they are busy attacking Disney and creating voting districts that favor their base. Yes, they are holding yet another special session in May (at taxpayers’ expense) to talk about property insurance, but where were these concerns in the regular legislative session. I suspect they were buried under the scripts of political theater designed to feature the governor. I guess I should be thankful that when I am homeless and uninsured at least I do not have to worry about textbooks in schools that might talk about the economic and racial divide in Florida or that teachers might accidentally launch into a sex education class in kindergarten. That is a solution looking for a problem.

Robin Frank, Tampa

I live in Florida and I am telling you, this is playing poorly here. We have actual needs that the legislature is just flat out ignoring in order to pursue these idiotic, harmful culture war bs battles.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids from heterosexual families get to see their situation reflected in books in school and read about families like their own in books in school but kids with same sex parents are not allowed to do this?

Because the former is normal and the latter is not. And, look, I support gay marriage, detest the hateful discrimination to which gay people are subjected, and think we have a lot of work to do overcoming our historical prejudices. But that's the reason. And I think you know that.

I think your real question is why should we give heterosexual relationships preferential treatment. I think people advocating for that kind of preferential treatment would be able to advance some non-crazy arguments having to do with the value of heterosexual relationships in both producing children and giving them a stable environment to grow up. Maybe couple that with the idea that you teach the kids about the rules before you teach them about the exception to the rules. E.g. you give them a grasp of Newtonian physics before bending their minds with Einstein's stuff. But, of course, the non-crazy arguments are hopelessly tied up with a bunch of homophobic cultural baggage. So, the argument would probably devolve into name calling and finger pointing pretty quickly.

I think you need to get out more. A certain percentage of the human population is gay and always has been and always will be. Not abnormal at all.

Depends what you mean by "normal." If you mean good, non-scary people that we should treat with dignity, love, and respect, then I totally agree. But if we're talking more in the sense of "statistically mainstream," then no.

Statistically mainstream? What are you talking about? Rights are not given to statistically mainstream people whatever that is supposed to mean. My kid is unusually tall...outside of statistically main stream....and if you think you are denying any rights to him because of that, think again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids from heterosexual families get to see their situation reflected in books in school and read about families like their own in books in school but kids with same sex parents are not allowed to do this?

Because the former is normal and the latter is not. And, look, I support gay marriage, detest the hateful discrimination to which gay people are subjected, and think we have a lot of work to do overcoming our historical prejudices. But that's the reason. And I think you know that.

I think your real question is why should we give heterosexual relationships preferential treatment. I think people advocating for that kind of preferential treatment would be able to advance some non-crazy arguments having to do with the value of heterosexual relationships in both producing children and giving them a stable environment to grow up. Maybe couple that with the idea that you teach the kids about the rules before you teach them about the exception to the rules. E.g. you give them a grasp of Newtonian physics before bending their minds with Einstein's stuff. But, of course, the non-crazy arguments are hopelessly tied up with a bunch of homophobic cultural baggage. So, the argument would probably devolve into name calling and finger pointing pretty quickly.

I think you need to get out more. A certain percentage of the human population is gay and always has been and always will be. Not abnormal at all.

Depends what you mean by "normal." If you mean good, non-scary people that we should treat with dignity, love, and respect, then I totally agree. But if we're talking more in the sense of "statistically mainstream," then no.

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids from heterosexual families get to see their situation reflected in books in school and read about families like their own in books in school but kids with same sex parents are not allowed to do this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do kids from heterosexual families get to see their situation reflected in books in school and read about families like their own in books in school but kids with same sex parents are not allowed to do this?

Because the former is normal and the latter is not. And, look, I support gay marriage, detest the hateful discrimination to which gay people are subjected, and think we have a lot of work to do overcoming our historical prejudices. But that's the reason. And I think you know that.

I think your real question is why should we give heterosexual relationships preferential treatment. I think people advocating for that kind of preferential treatment would be able to advance some non-crazy arguments having to do with the value of heterosexual relationships in both producing children and giving them a stable environment to grow up. Maybe couple that with the idea that you teach the kids about the rules before you teach them about the exception to the rules. E.g. you give them a grasp of Newtonian physics before bending their minds with Einstein's stuff. But, of course, the non-crazy arguments are hopelessly tied up with a bunch of homophobic cultural baggage. So, the argument would probably devolve into name calling and finger pointing pretty quickly.

I think you need to get out more. A certain percentage of the human population is gay and always has been and always will be. Not abnormal at all.

Depends what you mean by "normal." If you mean good, non-scary people that we should treat with dignity, love, and respect, then I totally agree. But if we're talking more in the sense of "statistically mainstream," then no.

Statistically mainstream? What are you talking about? Rights are not given to statistically mainstream people whatever that is supposed to mean. My kid is unusually tall...outside of statistically main stream....and if you think you are denying any rights to him because of that, think again.