It used to be that talking to other people’s young children about sex aroused suspicion — or worse. Now refusing to let other people talk to your kids about sex can arouse political opposition. This is the case in Florida, where a bill that would limit children’s exposure in school to conversations about so-called gender and sexual orientation is getting intense push-back from Democrats in and out of the media.
In fact, Joe Biden (or his handlers, most likely) called it a “hateful bill” on Twitter.
The legislation, HB 1557, passed by the Florida House’s GOP-controlled Education and Employment Committee last month and more recently by the state’s Senate Education Committee, has been almost universally and demagogically dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” bill by mainstream media. Yet here’s what it actually states:
Schools “may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students” (HB 1557, pages 3, 4).
The bill also states on page three that a “school district may not adopt procedures or student support forms that require school district personnel to withhold information about his or her student’s mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being, or a change in related services or monitoring, or that encourage or have the effect of encouraging a student to withhold from a parent such information, unless a reasonably prudent person would believe that such disclosure would result in abuse, abandonment, or neglect, as those terms are defined in s. 39.01.”
In reality, the term “gay” does not appear anywhere in the four-page bill, nor does “homosexual,” “LGBTQ,” or any related term. Thus does it speak volumes when sexual devolutionaries claim the legislation is “hateful,” “bigoted,” or targets “LGBTQ” youth.
To analogize the matter, imagine schools developed the bizarre habit of discussing food with kids in class, with emphasis mainly on pushing fruitcake (maybe because their personnel had stock in fruitcake companies). Then, when a law is made prohibiting the classroom discussion of food in general, the fruitcake peddlers get all up in arms protesting that they’ve been singled out.
Might it not be more correct to say, though, that they singled themselves out? For all kids eat and have their tastes, yet the fruitcake peddlers obsessively insisted on pushing their taste and placing it front and center.
This illustrates the reflexive bias in all these sexual devolutionary stories. It is, of course, true that HB 1557 is a response to the “LGBTQ” agenda’s insertion into curricula. But a “response” is just that: “a reaction to something.” The bill is not aimed at introducing some new and bizarre innovation, but is a defensive action aimed at protecting a legitimate status quo that has been targeted with a new and bizarre innovation.
So this situation reflects what’s now another status quo: The Left will start a blaze that threatens to destroy the city and, when traditionalists try dousing the flames, will scream, “Why are you so obsessed with fire!” Or it’s a bit like a man accosting you and raining down punches and, when you merely raise your arms to block, his protesting, “Why are you so violent?!”
It’s a very clever switcheroo: With the help of the culture-shaping media, academia, entertainment, Big Tech, and corporate America, the Left is adept at making last Thursday’s innovation storms seem like this Thursday’s norms — and resistance to them appear as radicalism.
In reality, some would argue that HB 1557 doesn’t go far enough. The Florida Times-Union writes that legislation “was introduced by Rep. Joe Harding, R-Williston, who said the bill won’t stop conversations about identity altogether, but rather, guarantee that school personnel can’t make decisions regarding a student’s health without involving parents.” Yet we could ask: Why should schools be discussing “identity” at all unless it’s that our real identity is “child of God”?
Ah, “separation of church and state,” critics will say? Well, how about separation of sexuality and state?
Apropos to this, at an event Monday in Miami, Governor Ron DeSantis said that schools “need to teach them [students] science, history. We need more civics and understanding of the U.S. Constitution, what makes our country unique, all those basic stuff.”
Put differently, it’s as with those “Which one does not belong” exercises in school. Reading, writing, arithmetic, science, history, geography…sex?
This hints at the deeper issue, too: While blame for the schoolhouse sexual obsession is placed on the “LGBTQ” crew, they did not start that fire — at least not alone. “Sexual devolutionaries” (a blanket term) in general did.
That is to say, why is “sex education” in schools at all? This phenomenon was essentially unheard of prior to the 1950s and really became an issue only in the ‘60s. It is as anomalous, historically speaking, as anything taught through it.
Modern sex education also largely, if not completely, can be traced back to the “work” of discredited bug researcher-turned-”sexual authority” Alfred Kinsey. Kinsey had specialized in study of the gall wasp, and he had more than gall. In fact, he was a scientific fraud who, with his Kinsey Institute underlings, ran a pedophile operation masquerading as “research.”
For those disputing this, know that Kinsey’s crew collected “data” on, to put it delicately, the “sexual responses” of young children, some in infancy. You can use your imagination as to how this was accomplished, but it’s all exposed in my 2009 essay, “According to Kinsey, Deviancy Is the New Normal.”
Given its sordid beginnings, it’s not surprising that our sex-education era correlates with growing depravity and worse outcomes. For example, while America’s out-of-wedlock birthrate was approximately four percent in the 1940s, it’s 40 percent today.
The bottom line is that earlier sexual devolutionaries opened the door for later ones. Yet it’s never to late to close that door (after taking out the trash), and HB 1557-like legislation is a start.
So, “Don’t Say Gay”? A better slogan to associate with the bill is, “Don’t Say Nay.”
