Let’s not pretend conservatives are banning books in school libraries simply because of graphic sexual content

[Billy000]

Ignore these people. This thread is a troll thread and the fascist mods are going to protect it.

Forget how leftist parasites tried to ban Maus because it depicted what a socialist government did to 12 million people across europe in the 1940's, and they did that because of a few drawings that were not erotic in the most remote way, but that was their excuse.

lol you’re such a whiny little bitch snowflake. You’re an international embarrassment, really.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Not watching the stupid ass MAGA video. Answer the question.

I would be happy to post a pic from the book "Gender Queer" that has been in countless schools across the land, but the site rules here prevent me from doing so because it is a graphic depiction of underage children performing oral sex.

If a site meant for ADULTS won't allow this image, why do you wish to expose children to it? Especially inasmuch as the book ENCOURAGES children to perform sexual acts, what possible educational function does it serve to begin with?

This little act you are playing about feigning ignorance so as to avoid addressing what is really going on in schools is most unappealing.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Because the maudes have gone full hack.

Being a leftist now seems to be the qualification for being one.

 

[theHawk]

A gay relationship in a kid’s book that lacks any sexual content is completely harmless to kids regardless of whether or not you snowflake, drama queen, bitch fucks approve of it. Like seriously, fuck what you think lol

A gay relationship should not be in any children‘s book, you psychopath.

Pushing homosexuality as “normal” is grooming kids into believing it’s normal. I don’t give a shit if you call that being a snowflake or a drama queen. It’s disgusting behavior and we will fight it. None of your insults will change that.

 

[themirrorthief]

I’m not suggesting there haven’t been books banned in the past. I’m talking about the current trend we are in now. Book banning in this day and age has been taken to a whole new level in terms of how many books and the content involved.

have you ever heard of barns and noble...if you want your kids reading gay porn spend a little money

 

[Billy000]

A gay relationship should not be in any children‘s book, you psychopath.

Pushing homosexuality as “normal” is grooming kids into believing it’s normal. I don’t give a shit if you call that being a snowflake or a drama queen. It’s disgusting behavior and we will fight it. None of your insults will change that.

Lol god you’re no smarter some moronic 8th grader. Clearly you lack the emotional maturity for me to believe you’re any older than that

Let’s examine your neanderthal logic anyway though. Let’s say that a kid comes to believe that homosexuality is “normal”. Okay then what? What effect would this have on the kid? We can even pretend to agree that it is abnormal for the sake of argument. Now you have to explain why it would matter if the kid finds it normal even if it isn’t.

Go ahead. I’ll wait.

 

[theHawk]

Lol god you’re no smarter some moronic 8th grader. Clearly you lack the emotional maturity for me to believe you’re any older than that

Let’s examine your neanderthal logic anyway though. Let’s say that a kid comes to believe that homosexuality is “normal”. Okay then what? What effect would this have on the kid? We can even pretend to agree that it is abnormal for the sake of argument. Now you have to explain why it would matter if the kid finds it normal even if it isn’t.

Go ahead. I’ll wait.

Yes, it does affect kids. The vast majority of homosexuals admit they were “recruited” when they were minors.


More on how groomers are going after kids:

Keeping Hell Hot For Teacher

We all know the extreme bias in the MSM, this is just another example of that. And the teacher in Idaho is a groomer. That tiny community has a very limited budget for books so she is buying sick and degenerate ones to groom the skulls full of mush. ********************* Avast, ye teachers...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[struth]

I’m not suggesting there haven’t been books banned in the past. I’m talking about the current trend we are in now. Book banning in this day and age has been taken to a whole new level in terms of how many books and the content involved.

banning books with strong graphic. sexual content is nothing new

 

[Billy000]

Yes, it does affect kids. The vast majority of homosexuals admit they were “recruited” when they were minors.


More on how groomers are going after kids:

Keeping Hell Hot For Teacher

We all know the extreme bias in the MSM, this is just another example of that. And the teacher in Idaho is a groomer. That tiny community has a very limited budget for books so she is buying sick and degenerate ones to groom the skulls full of mush. ********************* Avast, ye teachers...

www.usmessageboard.com

Lol the vast majority said this huh? Nope. You literally made that.

 

[FA_Q2]

Yup, still avoiding the outright racism in the book I presented.

What a shocker.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why are you so staunch in defending any efforts to expose young children to sexual perversion and depravity, or to violent criminal and terrorist behavior?

Most of us do not think that “free speech” covers grooming children to be sex perverts or violent criminals.

But they can't say a prayer or the Pledge of Allegiance in class

 

[ClaireH]

What books do you want children to read that they are not allowed to read?

What specific titles and why?

I am late in reading this thread but this question, when expanded to almost all things politic, highlights the solution to discarding bulk labeling, bulk actions and bulk responses. We’ve been well conditioned since birth to label every single thing, and that’s necessary in order to communicate to make sure everybody is on the same same page about what “it” is (no pun intended about Bill Clinton lol) However, we’ve moved into this obscure stage of using these generalized labels to identify things in bulk (books, people, party affiliation) to make statements like, “All gay books are bad” and “who cares what the titles of these books are”-(what?!) Of course it matters what the titles are because that absolutely implies you’ve not even reviewed the individual books whatsoever, but classifying all books under a bulk category.

A good example of bulk labeling gone awry: The local police have been informed that a group of men broke into a house. The police arrive at the property and immediately arrest all of the homeowners on that end of the block. Who cares about the names of the people involved, right? Uh, no. Same for not reviewing individual books at school libraries. Parents need to be proactive, more than ever, to ensure their kids are being taught valuable lessons and not social indoctrination or glorification over some subset of the population.

 

[ColonelAngus]

I am late in reading this thread but this question, when expanded to almost all things politic, highlights the solution to discarding bulk labeling, bulk actions and bulk responses. We’ve been well conditioned since birth to label every single thing, and that’s necessary in order to communicate to make sure everybody is on the same same page about what “it” is (no pun intended about Bill Clinton lol) However, we’ve moved into this obscure stage of using these generalized labels to identify things in bulk (books, people, party affiliation) to make statements like, “All gay books are bad” and “who cares what the titles of these books are”-(what?!) Of course it matters what the titles are because that absolutely implies you’ve not even reviewed the individual books whatsoever, but classifying all books under a bulk category.

A good example of bulk labeling gone awry: The local police have been informed that a group of men broke into a house. The police arrive at the property and immediately arrest all of the homeowners on that end of the block. Who cares about the names of the people involved, right? Uh, no. Same for not reviewing individual books at school libraries. Parents need to be proactive, more than ever, to ensure their kids are being taught valuable lessons and not social indoctrination or glorification over some subset of the population.

Please post more. This is good stuff.

We totally agree.

 

[ClaireH]

A fourteen year old is maybe the worst age at which to read a book that sexualizes pre-teens. Fourteen is right when their sexuality is forming and they may be questioning it, and experimenting with it. That book encourages them to think of ten year olds as potential sex partners, at age at which they have access to ten year olds, as siblings, cousins, or in the school next door.

Absent that particular book, "Lawn Boy," they may not have imagined getting a ten year old boy to perform oral sex on them. But, now they have a book provided by adult educators that celebrates a ten year old boy performing oral sex.

Spot on. At the age of 14 I thought I knew everything about the world and considered my parents “way too strict”. I was the type that needed positive boundaries, however, as I was very impressionable. Most 14 year olds are impressionable, and 15 year olds, 16 year olds, and 17 year olds.

Kids do not mature at the same rate although there are shared similarities. A 14 to 17 year-old is still a kid emotionally and physically. Developmentally, the brainstem does not connect fully to the frontal lobe until the age of 23, on average. This is the area of the brain that determines the ability to perform logical thought.