DeSantis now banning dictionaries

Eagle_Eye said:
I have seen too many horror stories about school boards blowing off parents complaint's. Especially when there is bullying involved.
Click to expand...

Well, true but then bullying is a completely different thing and not addressed by the bill we're discussing. I maintain that allowing lawsuits to go forward against a school district (which in general enjoys sovereign immunity) just because some parent is bullhurt about something little Billy heard at school is opening a huge can of worms.

Which of course is the underlying motive here. Reichwingers want desperately to defund and abolish public education and have the taxpayers foot the bill for private schools, especially Xtian ones. Bankrupting school districts via stupid lawsuits is a step in that direction.
 
For the uneducated, low IQ dumbasses on the left; DeSantis didn't ban any books. He didn't go down to Sarasota and tell them not to accept dictionaries. He didn't write the bill the School district apparently is having trouble comprehending.

This is, once again, a Fake News story trying to promote a false narrative. :palm:
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Well, true but then bullying is a completely different thing and not addressed by the bill we're discussing. I maintain that allowing lawsuits to go forward against a school district (which in general enjoys sovereign immunity) just because some parent is bullhurt about something little Billy heard at school is opening a huge can of worms.

Which of course is the underlying motive here. Reichwingers want desperately to defund and abolish public education and have the taxpayers foot the bill for private schools, especially Xtian ones. Bankrupting school districts via stupid lawsuits is a step in that direction.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree some idiots will take advantage of the law. Limits on what can be allowed should be added.
 
The bill:

https://www.flsenate.gov/Committees/BillSummaries/2022/html/2823

The summary:

The bill (Chapter 2022-21, L.O.F.) establishes 12 year terms limits for school board members, and modifies school district requirements for instructional materials, including instructional materials in school libraries and media centers to provide increased oversight over, and public access to, all materials used in instruction.

School Board Member Term Limits

The bill establishes term limits of 12 years for school board members. A person may not appear on the ballot for reelection as a school board member if, by the end of his or her current term of office, the person will have served, or but for resignation would have served, in that office for 12 consecutive years. The term limits begin with the November 8, 2022, election, allowing current school board members to serve an additional 12 years.

Public Participation in the Instructional Materials Review Process

The bill requires that each district school board that holds meetings of committees convened for the purpose of selecting instructional materials for recommendation to the district school board must be noticed and open to the public, and must include parents of district students. Additionally, the bill modifies the requirement that each school district publish on its website a list of all instructional materials to include those used for specified required instruction.

A district school board must also:

Provide access to all materials, excluding teacher editions, at least 20 calendar days before the district school board takes any official action on such materials. This process must include reasonable safeguards against the unauthorized use, reproduction, and distribution of instructional materials considered for adoption;
Select, approve, adopt or purchase materials as a separate line item on the agenda, rather than on a consent agenda, and must provide a reasonable opportunity for public comment; and
Submit to the Commissioner of Education (commissioner), beginning June 30, 2023, an annual report that identifies:
Each material for which the school district received an objection in the school year and the specific objections;
Each material that was removed or discontinued as a result of an objection, by grade level and course.
The bill requires the Department of Education (DOE) to publish and update a list of materials that were removed or discontinued by district school boards as a result of an objection and disseminate the list to school districts for consideration in their instructional materials selection.

The bill requires each superintendent to identify, in the annual certification to the commissioner for the release of funds for instructional materials, any material that received an objection and the grade-level and course for which a removed or discontinued material was used.

Materials in School District Libraries and Media Centers

The bill requires that each book made available to students through a school district library media center or included in a recommended or assigned school or grade-level reading list must be selected by a school district employee who holds a valid educational media specialist certificate. The bill requires the DOE to develop an online training program for librarians and media specialists, which includes training on materials in school library media centers and reading lists, to be made available no later than January 1, 2023. After that date, personnel involved in the selection of school district library materials and reading lists must complete the training program developed by the DOE. Additionally, the bill requires each superintendent, beginning July 1, 2023, to annually certify to the commissioner that all school librarians and media center specialists have completed the online training program.

Each public elementary school is required by the bill to publish on its website a list of all materials maintained in the school library or required as part of a booklist used in a classroom. In addition, each district school board is required to adopt and post on the website procedures for developing library media center collections. At a minimum, the procedures must:

Require book selections to be free of pornography and prohibited materials harmful to minors, suited to student needs, and appropriate for the grade level and age group;
Require consultation of reputable, professionally recognized sources and school community stakeholders for each selection;
Provide for library media center collections based on reader interest, support of state academic standards and aligned curriculum, and the academic needs of students and faculty; and
Provide for the regular removal or discontinuance of books based on factors specified in the bill, including those removed because of an objection by a parent or resident of the county.
The bill provides that school principals are responsible for overseeing compliance with school library media center materials selection procedures at the school in which they are assigned.
 
guno said:
Will Florida now ban christmas carols?

Deck the halls with boughs of holly
Fa la la la la, la la la la (fa la la la la, la la la la)
'Tis the season to be jolly
Fa la la la la, la la la la (fa la la la la, la la la la)
Don we now our gay apparel
Fa la la la la, la la la la (fa la la la la, la la la la)
Troll the ancient Yuletide carol
Fa la la la la, la la la la
Click to expand...

:laugh:

Good point. My oldest daughter's h.s. marching band was forbidden to play "White Rabbit" because some parents were aghast at alleged drug stuff. This nonsense has been going on for decades.

High School Pulls 'White Rabbit' From Marching Band's Routine
 
guno said:
Will Florida now ban christmas carols?

Deck the halls with boughs of holly
Fa la la la la, la la la la (fa la la la la, la la la la)
'Tis the season to be jolly
Fa la la la la, la la la la (fa la la la la, la la la la)
Don we now our gay apparel
Fa la la la la, la la la la (fa la la la la, la la la la)
Troll the ancient Yuletide carol
Fa la la la la, la la la la
Click to expand...

And off to woo woo land we go. LOL
 
Eagle_Eye said:
Oh I agree some idiots will take advantage of the law. Limits on what can be allowed should be added.
Click to expand...

Agree. And provide complaint steps as well.

1. Speak to the kid's teacher.
2. Speak to the principle.
3. Speak to the superintendent.
4. Present a statement to the school board signed by X-number of other parents.
5. Appeal adverse decision.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Well, true but then bullying is a completely different thing and not addressed by the bill we're discussing. I maintain that allowing lawsuits to go forward against a school district (which in general enjoys sovereign immunity) just because some parent is bullhurt about something little Billy heard at school is opening a huge can of worms.

Which of course is the underlying motive here. Reichwingers want desperately to defund and abolish public education and have the taxpayers foot the bill for private schools, especially Xtian ones. Bankrupting school districts via stupid lawsuits is a step in that direction.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a solid plan! :laugh: :tongout:

Behold America's 1st textbook! There's no disputing that it was, either.

https://www.amazon.com/New-England-...?asin=092527917X&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1

You can even read some, babydoll! :D

I have one from the 1930s around here someplace. I have Little Black Sambo and Uncle Remus, too!
 
Last edited:
Shoresy said:
That's what they get for redefining the words "female" and "vaccine" no more Orwellian memory hole bullshit in Florida, choke on it.
Click to expand...

Dictionaries are not for making political judgments on word usage. They are for taking a word's use in common language and giving an explanation of the use. The dictionaries in question haven't "redefined" the word "female". They have supplied an additional definition that has recently entered the culture and seems here to stay. The only political judgment in this is banning the definition. It's like putting your finger in a dam about to give way. The culture will win out in due course.
 
AssHatZombie said:
enjoys sovereign immunity?

wtf?
Click to expand...

"Public schools and their employees are usually immune from suit under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. This doctrine provides that a governmental entity may not be sued except with its express consent and waiver of the doctrine. "

https://www.neumannlawgroup.com/sch...downer will not be,and waiver of the doctrine.

(This applies to personal injury/negligence. Butt-hurt parents whose kid heard that gay people are born that way might or might not fall under this doctrine.)
 
martin said:
Dictionaries are not for making political judgments on word usage. They are for taking a word's use in common language and giving an explanation of the use. The dictionaries in question haven't "redefined" the word "female". They have supplied an additional definition that has recently entered the culture and seems here to stay. The only political judgment in this is banning the definition. It's like putting your finger in a dam about to give way. The culture will win out in due course.
Click to expand...

Yes, it will. It wasn't that long ago that interracial couples were never shown on TV or in advertising because it was just too unspeakable. Now look.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Yes, it will. It wasn't that long ago that interracial couples were never shown on TV or in advertising because it was just too unspeakable. Now look.
Click to expand...

"Woke" is now in the dictionary as having a meaning in addition to the past tense of wake. Do you think our anti-Orwellian asshole wants it banned?
 
martin said:
Dictionaries are not for making political judgments on word usage. They are for taking a word's use in common language and giving an explanation of the use. The dictionaries in question haven't "redefined" the word "female". They have supplied an additional definition that has recently entered the culture and seems here to stay. The only political judgment in this is banning the definition. It's like putting your finger in a dam about to give way. The culture will win out in due course.
Click to expand...

Oh! I see! The commie fuckwads redefine words every year so a new dictionary is needed annually to keep up with their changing of words.

Two words: Fuck That!

In addition, those motherfuckers do not have the authority to be arbitrarily changing word definitions just because they want to.
 
Matt Dillon said:
Oh! I see! The commie fuckwads redefine words every year so a new dictionary is needed annually to keep up with their changing of words.

Two words: Fuck That!

In addition, those motherfuckers do not have the authority to be arbitrarily changing word definitions just because they want to.
Click to expand...

You might be happier if you did see. You would be smarter anyway.
 
This book restricting (from both sides) is ridiculous.

Free speech is sacred.
And it should apply to ALL Americans...no matter how young or old.


And save the bullshit about 'children must be protected'.
That is over.
Most children have access to the internet which is full of all kinds of pornography, politics, gay this and woke that.
It is IMPOSSIBLE to 'shelter' children like parents used to do.

Children can handle the truth.

ALL books, EVER written should be available to ANY human that wants to read them.

You don't agree?
Than you are against free speech.
 
TOP said:
Donate directly to the classrooms.
Click to expand...

That is illegal now in Florida. It must go through "media specialist", who must risk imprisonment if a judge decides that anything in the books are "woke". And they have some crazy judges in Florida.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top