485
Ron DeSantis bans Florida's sex ed classes from mentioning anatomy & contraceptives
(www.lgbtqnation.com)
this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
485 points (99.0% liked)
politics
19097 readers
3434 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Ok, the title comes from the linked article, but they aren't banned from "mentioning anatomy". They are banned from showing pictures of reproductive organs.
I don't know why some people seem compelled to take a story that's plenty horrible as it stands and give it a deceptive headline... seems like I'm seeing more of that recently. Are we really in a post-truth era?
I'd guess it was an attempt to keep the title succinct, then not proofing it properly. In any case, always read the article before commenting as titles are frequently misleading (intentional or not).
It’s even more unnecessary because the content is already plenty concerning in my opinion. I don’t see a need to embellish.
Without seeing the document you're not going to see the whole picture. This is a summary of that document that has some inconsistent wording, but until the article and the document are compared you can't even say what the truth is.
That's a fine rationale for omissions but the headline is directly misstating the guidance on anatomy. It's unnecessary for the article to call it out in the headline.
My point is it's misstated based on the Orlando Sentinel article linked, but the document isn't linked so we don't actually know what the source of truth actually says.
So when you don’t know what it is, you make it up? This is shit journalism. Period.
How is that any better? Next your going to rationalize having no books in a literature class, showing no pictures of cells in a biology class, or having a trigonometry class without using the devil's radians.
I don't know why some people seem compelled to ignore all context and rationalize state sponored religious persecution in the name of "protecting the children". It's not post-truth just because you've decided to willfully ignore all the context.
Exactly. Because it's not any better ("plenty horrible as it stands" as I put it in my original comment), the deceptive headline is not only unnecessary, but also taints the entire story with falsehood when it should not be so degraded.
Mentioning anatomy isn't substantially different than photos of anatomy in a classroom setting unless you're a troll looking for a knit to pick.
We live in an age where people are obsessively needy about being outraged to the point where they need to make shit up topics one another off.
Lemmy is probably the best example of this behavior.