> The law could be described as “baring presentations about sex (straight or otherwise) to a classroom of 5-8 year olds”

One of the authors of the bill was asked if a math textbook that had a word problem saying "Jimmy and his dads go to the store..." would be in violation of this law. He responded that this was precisely the sort of thing the law was intending to prevent.

The law is very much not just about direct sex education prior to 3rd grade.

Such subversively worded math problems should be avoided, no matter who the named parties are.

"Jimmy, Jack, and John go to the store..." would be just as effective of a setup for a story problem without sneaking in moral displays.

Regardless of your opinion of the "subversive" nature of such a word problem, it becomes exceedingly clear that the bill is about more than "presentations about sex (straight or otherwise) to a classroom of 5-10 year olds", as the parent claims.

>> "Jimmy and his dads go to the store..."

> Such subversively worded math problems should be avoided, no matter who the named parties are.

Thinking that phrase is "subversive" is a hard right stance. Classifying it as "sex" talk seems like a literal mental illness.

Are they also going to avoid tacit mentions of heterosexual relationships?

There are things they could try to avoid. It might be a bit early teaching 8 year old kids about tits alternative and wiener measure.

They should, in a kids' math textbook.