Proverbs 12:15 or 14:7? Not prayers, admittedly, but good advice. " Leave the presence of a fool, for there you do not meet words of knowledge.
Plus an addendum on the number of women who have died because they couldn’t get a medically necessary abortion.
I know the headline implied that no one is even allowed to discuss these things, but what the bill says is that they’re banning teachers from instructing students under 6th grade about them. I don’t think two kids talking to each other about these subjects will result in either of them going to jail.
Regarding the emergency need for a product, since that may not be considered ‘instructing’, I don’t know. But I suspect it would be met with the student being sent to the nurse’s office and/or a call to their guardian. I imagine that’s the case now, as well.
You know I’m 64 years old, and we (the girls) had, “The Talk” at school about menstruation when I was in 4th. grade. The boys had some other instruction, but I don’t know what it was about. There was no out cry, no gnashing of teeth, no rending of garments. Just the basics, and instructions to talk to the teacher if it started at school. That was about 1968 and I was apx. 9.
Then why does the Bill’s author think otherwise?
Because he knows how it will be enforced, regardless of how it is written?
Does he think otherwise, or does he say otherwise?
For the same reason that a timeshare salesperson will tell you what a great deal you are getting.
He specifically said it would prohibit the girls themselves from talking about it:
“So if little girls experience their menstrual cycle in fifth grade or fourth grade, would that prohibit conversations from them since they are in a grade lower than sixth grade?”
McClain confirmed that the bill’s language would do exactly that: “It would” McClain responded.
The bills author or the news article’s author?
And who are those conversations between?
“Conversations from them” indicates to me that the girls themselves cannot talk about it, whether to a teacher or to each other. It suggests that they cannot approach a teacher for assistance if needed. This is absolutely indefensible.
Okay, so what does that have to do with your question?
Timeshare salesmen are not noted for trying to convince you that their deal is even worse than it appears.
If they didn’t want to deal with gross menstrual cycles, they should have chosen to be born male.
/s
Worse for who?
We are not the intended audience.
My question is that since the bill apparently criminalizes these conversations, what kinds of charges will fifth-graders face for talking about their periods?
The whole thing is insane.
Can you quote that part of the bill? From what I’ve read* it does not ban conversations between friends. It bans instruction (presumably from teachers) and even then, it bans the teachers from teaching it, it doesn’t ban kids from hearing it.
I entirely agree, however, there’s a lot of great reasons to hate this bill, you don’t have to make up new ones. All that does it make it easier for the other side to undermine your argument.
*ie “…such instruction may only occur in grades 6 through 12…”. I haven’t seen anything addressing kids talking amongst themselves nor anything suggesting the kids on the receiving end of said instruction would also be breaking the law.
And see what a mess your generation has made of the world! No further evidence needed. Wars, inflation, poverty, pandemics, FFS! You can’t tell me there’s no connection. Shoulda kept those girlies in the dark! The less they know about Things, the better off we’ll all be. 
/big-time sarcasm
Ah, I’ve been so blind. This is the true reason for the collapse of American society.
Apparently you didn’t read the part where the bill’s author specifically said it would do exactly that. I quoted it and posted a cite. Ignoring that and pretending they didn’t actually say what they in fact actually said makes you appear to be arguing in bad faith.