Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

by **orathaic** » Fri Oct 21, 2022 7:56 am

Good point, but i didn't think this would only affect federal funding, i thought it was going to criminalise groups who exposed children to queer content.

I guess you could create a religion which celebrates queerness and use religious freedom law to circumvent, but you then still have the same issue of not being in federally funded educational spaces.

I hope "discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity" is challenged as including all reference to mothers (identified as female), fathers (identified as male) or marriages (sexual unions).

by **Doom427** » Thu Oct 20, 2022 12:31 pm

Randomizer wrote: ↑
Thu Oct 20, 2022 2:28 am
So he's going to ban the Bible being available to children? Or require only a sanitized version that removes all nekton of sex, rape, circumcision, .... Because you can't even make it through Genesis without mention of sodomy, rape, and other sex acts like Lot offering up his own daughters for sex.

Well, the law wouldn't actually affect that at all. Maybe I'm revealing my heathen past too much, but ... Churchs don't get federal funds anyway b/c they aren't taxed. And those stories aren't discussed in Christian circles at all unless someone is an atheist- it would scare away the children you're trying to indoctrinate.

I mean... I don't think federal funds should be used to expose children to Bibles? I'd say we as a country don't want that, considering the separation of church and state. Federal funds being used in an institution where children are given Bible stories just... Shouldn't happen unless those institutions also show stories from other religious traditions.

by **Randomizer** » Thu Oct 20, 2022 2:28 am

So he's going to ban the Bible being available to children? Or require only a sanitized version that removes all nekton of sex, rape, circumcision, .... Because you can't even make it through Genesis without mention of sodomy, rape, and other sex acts like Lot offering up his own daughters for sex.

by **flash2015** » Wed Oct 19, 2022 8:24 pm

Doom427 wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 19, 2022 8:03 pm
Didn't we just go through this entire song and dance with Roe? Everyone insisting nothing will ever change and obviously these laws will never happen and then they just do?

I thought it was pretty obvious Roe was in trouble when Amy Coney Barrett was placed on the Supreme Court.

by **flash2015** » Wed Oct 19, 2022 8:15 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 19, 2022 7:00 pm
Would I be wrong in thinking that this is just political posturing? Is there any way that this could actually become law considering the numbers in government?

What it sounds like to me is the Republicans are just engineering a headline "Democrats in favour of sexually explicit material for kids" to take into an election battle. The actual substance of the Bill is largely irrelevant as it won't happen.

Pretty much...though the suggestions go even further to suggest that Democrats are "groomers" and "paedophiles". This also conveniently ties back to QAnon too.

by **Doom427** » Wed Oct 19, 2022 8:03 pm

Didn't we just go through this entire song and dance with Roe? Everyone insisting nothing will ever change and obviously these laws will never happen and then they just do?

by **Doom427** » Wed Oct 19, 2022 8:02 pm

I'm not as sure as y'all that this just won't ever happen. Sure, this bill in particular won't pass right now- but it's entirely up in the air who will be president and in control of Congress come 2024.

And as far as legal challenges, well, the Florida bill has survived challenges and I have zero reason to expect this supreme court to take an effort in defending Gay Rights. The only case we're going to see from them about queerness will be an overturning of gay marriage in 2/3 years and likely a restriction on gender transition.

by **Octavious** » Wed Oct 19, 2022 7:00 pm

Would I be wrong in thinking that this is just political posturing? Is there any way that this could actually become law considering the numbers in government?

What it sounds like to me is the Republicans are just engineering a headline "Democrats in favour of sexually explicit material for kids" to take into an election battle. The actual substance of the Bill is largely irrelevant as it won't happen.

by **orathaic** » Wed Oct 19, 2022 6:13 pm

Doom427 wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 19, 2022 3:41 pm
Mike Johnson, a House Representative, has just submitted a new bill that would ban any exposure to "sexually-explicit materials" to children under the age of 10, with sexually explicit being defined as description of sex, lewd genitalia, and most broadly "any topic involving sexual orientation, gender identity, gender dysphoria, or related subjects" in a Federally-Funded institution (think Schools, Universities, Hospitals, & Libraries)

I haven't exactly been hiding that I'm a lesbian on this forum, so I think we can tell where I stand on this- it would functionally ban anything aimed toward children on Queerness...

I dunno, sounds like a ban on discussing marriage, unless they only believe in loveless marriage.... Any character who is cis gendered, or heterosexual, or related subjects like marriage, child-rearing... It is such a wide net being cast, i can't see how this would not result in several queer groups taking legal action.

by **Fluminator** » Wed Oct 19, 2022 5:57 pm

That is rough. Honestly, if I was a woman I'd be a lesbian too, and I have mad respect for you not compromising on your type and still shooting your shots, even as society tries to make it a taboo. I know a lot of men who wouldn't have the balls to do that in your position.

I do agree we shouldn't be sexualizing the kids but in my experience the straights do it more. Growing up if I ever had a female friend I would be relentlessly teased for having "a girlfriend" and "when's the marriage".
The drag queen shows for children is honestly too much in my opinion because by its nature it's a very sexualized thing and it is being taken too far in some cases, but sex ed is a pretty important thing and it doesn't have to be so weird to talk about it.

But I feel they're just using that as an excuse to make this law overreach to way many things that it shouldn't. It's not good and a bit scary.
You should come move to Canada, escape America while you still can.

by **Doom427** » Wed Oct 19, 2022 4:10 pm

Fluminator wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 19, 2022 3:54 pm
Does this make it illegal to tell a kid that their mom gave birth to them?

I could hire a lawyer to say that, but no judge would actually accept it so

Though if it was a transgender man who gave birth to a child, that would be impossible to discuss (even though this is something that has happened in real life, many times)

by **Fluminator** » Wed Oct 19, 2022 3:54 pm

Does this make it illegal to tell a kid that their mom gave birth to them?

by **Doom427** » Wed Oct 19, 2022 3:41 pm

Mike Johnson, a House Representative, has just submitted a new bill that would ban any exposure to "sexually-explicit materials" to children under the age of 10, with sexually explicit being defined as description of sex, lewd genitalia, and most broadly "any topic involving sexual orientation, gender identity, gender dysphoria, or related subjects" in a Federally-Funded institution (think Schools, Universities, Hospitals, & Libraries)

I haven't exactly been hiding that I'm a lesbian on this forum, so I think we can tell where I stand on this- it would functionally ban anything aimed toward children on Queerness, and further if interpreted broadly would ban anything with Queerness if a child could theoretically see it (Go to 4.c.1.A. to see where this interpretation could begin). With this more broad definition, if webdipomacy accepted Federal Funds for some reason, I would not be allowed to mention my girlfriend at all on this website if a child could ever see it(though discussions of heterosexual relationships would still be considered legal). But I'm a childless and soulless dyke- where do the respectable folks of the forum stand on this?

Oh, and just to make sure we have a relevant conversation- A link to the press release on Mike Johnson's website. It also includes the full text of the bill. It's not even ten pages- pretty easy read.
https://mikejohnson.house.gov/news/docu ... entID=1206

Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Re: Federal Don't Say Gay Bill

Federal Don't Say Gay Bill