Comments on: Tennessee’s “Don’t Say Gay” Bill is Back

By: NancyP

NancyP — Fri, 17 Feb 2012 00:46:16 +0000

I think that Tennessee teachers should start talking about asexuality as an orientation. Let’s see the fundies’ heads explode: virginity equals perversion…

By: Charles

Charles — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 18:58:20 +0000

This law is going to make it hard for teachers to discuss current events in the classroom. And, I think that teachers, the adults, have a moral obligation to deal with bullies in a harsh manner.

By: SammySeattle

SammySeattle — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 17:50:42 +0000

So, no discussion of in vitro or surrogacy?

By: hazemyth

hazemyth — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 17:00:12 +0000

Actually, wouldn’t the plain language of the senate bill mean that public schools would be limited to teaching sex ed?

I mean, it says ‘any material’ is limited to ‘natural human reproduction science’. It doesn’t specify sex ed materials, or biology class materials. Any material.

The second part is tautological, since it limits groups teaching ‘natural human reproduction science’ to teaching about ‘natural human reproduction science’. So, if you’re a group teaching ‘sensitivity regarding sexual minorities’, this part of the law ostensibly wouldn’t apply.

These absurdities aside, it still strikes me that the bill is overly vague. Would it apply to counseling materials? Health and hygiene materials provided by a nurse? Would it apply to history class?

By: Jim Hlavac

Jim Hlavac — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:11:30 +0000

Since most of our opponents like to call us “sick” and “ill” in some way or another, and NOM is famous for saying we’re stunted and sort of like infertility and others of the sort who like this bill, and probably testify for it, are quite sure we’re some how psychologically crazy or psychiatrically crazy in one way or another (though they’re not sure, other than “you’re gay,”) then this law is easily gotten around by application of Section 504 of the Federal Education Law, which specifically prohibits discrimination and demands even coddling and services in one form or another for anyone who is less than perfect psychologically, psychiatrically or fertility or reproductive wise. And so “notwithstanding any other law,” of course, this new law is moot from the get go. And you know, if our opponents keep saying we’re crazy then we should simply hoist them by their own petards on the matter, for then we’re covered by all the laws protecting crazy people. I mean really, where are our bright lawyers to counterintuitively agree that gays are crazy and infertile, ergo, Section 504 applies to us, and also that we deserve full disability and are covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act. If our opponents want to say we’re disabled, then agree with them, and push our inclusion in the law, and then let them sort out their mush, for it will flummox them in ways that might keel a few of them over.