The language of HB 1557: ``` Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten

The language of HB 1557: ``` 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 ``` The one paragraph in the bill is the entirety of the language used here. 1) "instruction" is vaguely defined here This isn't about sex-ed, this isn't about genitals, it is about "orientation or gender identity". I'll note here that being gay and trans isn't just about sex and genitalia. If a student asks the question: "why does sally have two moms?", does answering that question put the teacher at risk? What if Billy asks if being gay is ok? Are teachers allowed to answer? 2) if the teacher is trans and the students ask about it, what is the teacher allowed to say? Is the teacher able to write their name on the board with their preferred title? 3) Is the teacher allowed to mention the existence of their spouse regardless of orientation? 4) if a child is bullied for wearing clothes that don't match their percieved gender (i.e. boys wearing dresses), is a teacher allowed to explain that it is not ok to bully someone because of their gender? Regardless of what you think about a childs ability to make decisions about gender, you surely understand that they have an idea of what gender is and might decide to bully eachother for it. I will note that this bill is amended from its original language, which shows the true intent of the law: ``` A school district 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. ``` source: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/?Tab=BillText https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/?Tab=BillTex... I am basing this analysis entirely on the language of the bill and its amendments. I very much encourage you to look at the reasonable amendments that FAILED in committee here, as they speak volumes to the intent of the republican majority. My previous comment is informed by the documented behaviors and speech of right wing politicians and commentators around the passing of this bill, which do escalate this topic to dangerous levels of right-wing outrage. No there is not language in here that equates sex-education to grooming, but there is ABSOLUTELY discussion on the right that does draw that line.