Listen to the exact words in the exact books Democrats want in our public school libraries

[DBA]

I'm simply responding to the real issue that drives conservative outrage on this - homophobia

But its not. We would be opposed to this same book in a school library if it was describing sex in this manner between two heterosexual adults. But you already know this.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Dude seems to be getting all hot and bothered.

Maybe we need to keep him away from schools.

Try again

 

[MinTrut]

I give up.

I hope you'll try to grow past your homophobia.

You just aren’t worth my time.

I hope you make yourself, and your growth, worth your time.

You think porn is ok to have in public school libraries

No I don't - that's a lie.

and equate it to the Bible,

The Bible is FAR worse.

as if the Bible should be placed on the sheves at the corner mart next to the Hustlers and sold at XXX stores,

Straw man - I never said this.

I don't want the Bible - or Lawn Boy - banned from school libraries.

But neither is appropriate for under 12s.

which, ironically, have an 18+ age requirement.

Your straw man argument extended; meaningless.

That is an utterly absurd position.

It's YOUR straw man, and I agree - you're being ridiculous.

You are in some rare air.

The air I see is filled with your straw.

It must be lonely.

Projection?

 

[MinTrut]

But its not.

Disagree.

We would be opposed to this same book in a school library if it was describing sex in this manner between two heterosexual adults.

But it isn't.

But you already know this.

I know you don't want to grow, don't want to read the Bible, don't want to be real about this. Sad.

 

[DBA]

No I don't - that's a lie.

Maybe we just have totally different definitions of what is considered porn. As a society, there is a norm which we all tend to recognize, though admittedly that line has been moving further and further of late, especially with people like you pushing their agenda. We have a rating system on movies, which follows a norm. Certain words trigger certain ratings. Certain acts trigger certain ratings. Nudity and the extent of the nudity triggers certain ratings. Using these norms, if the section of this book was quoted by an actor in a movie and if this was acted out on screen as the pictures in the book portrays, it would be rated MA at the least. Not R, but MA.

The Bible is FAR worse.

Not even close and it really isn’t reasonable debateable. I see you enjoy being a contrarian, but this is silly. Please provide specific verses, not just these blanket statements.

Your straw man argument extended; meaningless.

Not a straw man at all.

 

[Dragonlady]

But its not. We would be opposed to this same book in a school library if it was describing sex in this manner between two heterosexual adults. But you already know this.

There are no books in public schools describing homosexual sex to children. You're a gullible idiot if you believe that

 

[DBA]

But it isn't

Are you suggesting it is ok then simply because it is describing a homosexual act vs a heterosexual act? That’s even more illogical than you previous positions.

I know you don't want to grow, don't want to read the Bible, don't want to be real about this. Sad.

I have read the Bible from cover to cover, many times. How about you?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Disagree.

But it isn't.

I know you don't want to grow, don't want to read the Bible, don't want to be real about this. Sad.

Do you support child pornography in schools? Yes or no. Stop deflecting

 

[DBA]

There are no books in public schools describing homosexual sex to children. You're a gullible idiot if you believe that

Maybe it is you that is the gullible idiot. First Google search for the first book that Sen. Kennedy quoted. It sure seems as though it was purchased for this school library.

Salina Public Schools decides not to ban "All Boys Aren't Blue" from the school library

 

[DBA]

Do you support child pornography in schools? Yes or no. Stop deflecting

Right out of the left-wing playbook, we are at the point where MinTrut is arguing what the definition of “is” is.

 

[JoeB131]

Provide verses and context.

I've done that dozens of times.... and usually, you bible thumpers either say, "That's the OLD Testament," or otherwise pretend you didn't see it.

The point is, when it comes to slavery, mutilating people, burning witches, and committing genocide, the bible is pretty clear on God's intent. God didn't change his mind... we changed ours.

It is one thing to have a book about it being ok to be gay, which is another disusstion, it is another to have book describing in graphic detail the sexual activities of a gay couple or a straight couple in a public school library.

As opposed to what they can actually SEE online or on TV?

Nothing to do with homophobia. If these books were describing a sex act in the same manner between a boy and a girl most people would agree it is inappropriate for a school library.

Okay, I go back to my comment about Orwell's 1984, which has several explicit sex scenes in it. Not only was it in the school library, it is required reading in many schools. (And I don't even think it's that good of a book. Definitely overrated.)

I also remember in Grammar School, the book "Jaws" was all the rage before they made it into a much better movie. The book contains a steamy subplot involving an affair between the oceanographer and the sheriff's wife. (Speilberg made the comment that reading the book, he found all the characters so unlikeable he was cheering for the shark.) Well, one of the kids in my class read it and was snickering about it to his buddies, and one of the frustrated lesbians in habits dragged him up in front of the class and humiliated him.

Again, it has nothing to do in my mind with it being a gay act, that is a different topic. The explcity of hte act is beyond what a child should be reading.

The thing is, it's a very small part of a much larger narrative. You guys focus in on that one gay scene.

I have a feeling that you are gay, which is why you have a bee in your bonnet about the subject and are so unreasonable, to the point of absurdity. 95%+ of American people would NOT be ok with this book being in their child’s school library. Unfortunately, a high percentage don’t know that this kind of stuff that is being pushed by the left, thanks to the national media. Ignorance is bliss and the Democratic politicians along with the MSM take full advantage.

Actually, here's the real problem.

The Plutocrats know this is the kind of absolutely stupid shit that gets dumb rednecks upset and voting against their own economic interests. It's why they've been doing this shit for the last 50 years.

End of the day, kids are going to see explicit material; we did when I was a kid in the 1970s, where we had access to adult novels our parents left lying around or were sometimes assigned because they were "classics". Every pre-teen in my neighborhood had his secret porn stash. Today with the internet, it's probably a lot easier.

 

[JoeB131]

Maybe it is you that is the gullible idiot. First Google search for the first book that Sen. Kennedy quoted. It sure seems as though it was purchased for this school library.

Salina Public Schools decides not to ban "All Boys Aren't Blue" from the school library

The book has been highly reviewed as a piece of literary work. Now, as a white cisgender, straight male, I probably have little context of where the author is coming from, but this is his story. Unless you think that little Timmy is going to read it and wish he was a gay black man.

All Boys Aren't Blue

In a series of personal essays, prominent journalist an…

www.goodreads.com

From the article you posted.

The committee acknowledged that passages in the book describing sexual activity may be uncomfortable to read but they held they do not detract from the value of the book. The members of the committee noted themes of the book could be affirming for students, allowing them to feel they are not alone.

 

[DBA]

The Plutocrats know this is the kind of absolutely stupid shit that gets dumb rednecks upset and voting against their own economic interests. It's why they've been doing this shit for the last 50 years.

For another thread, but it is absolute nonsense that I am voting against my own self-interest by voting for Republicans. Economics aside for the moment, the topic of this thread is a perfect example of why I am voting for the party that best represents my ideals. I have no interest in promoting the lunacy the left promotes.

 

[DBA]

The book has been highly reviewed as a piece of literary work. Now, as a white cisgender, straight male, I probably have little context of where the author is coming from, but this is his story. Unless you think that little Timmy is going to read it and wish he was a gay black man.

All Boys Aren't Blue

In a series of personal essays, prominent journalist an…

www.goodreads.com

From the article you posted.

The committee acknowledged that passages in the book describing sexual activity may be uncomfortable to read but they held they do not detract from the value of the book. The members of the committee noted themes of the book could be affirming for students, allowing them to feel they are not alone.

Yeah, we know, you agree with the book. You are on board with all this stuff. You don’t have any children so likely don’t care anyway. You refer to yourself as cisgender, which is the same as referring to yourself as non-disabled. You have bought into the whole ridiculous narrative that porn is ok for anybody at any age, that a boy can be a girl if he so chooses and that doctors should affirm dysphoria instead of trying to treat it. Frankly, it is sad, but typical of a society that is trending towards being over-run by physiological adults with child-like minds.

 

[HeyNorm]

Oh sugar.

I guess we need to ban a LOT more books.

When did conservatives become the Taliban?

We get a bit rowdy when pervs Target children.

 

[HeyNorm]

It constitutes approximately 0.3% or less of the entire work, and describes a consensual encounter.

It's MUCH less troubling than the kidnapping, trafficking, rape and murder of children advocated in the Bible.

To a homophobe, no doubt.

Did it arouse you?

Is that the problem?

What age?

The Bible is DEFINITELY not okay for under 12s in my view.

Consensual or not, graphic description of child sex is child porn.

You get it yet?

 

[MinTrut]

Maybe we just have totally different definitions of what is considered porn.

I don't think so.

I think you've just mistaken a book with a brief passage describing a gay sexual encounter - less than 0.3% of its content - with porn.

Why you've done this...

As a society, there is a norm which we all tend to recognize,

Does the Bible and it's incredibly disturbing contents and directives define this norm?

though admittedly that line has been moving further and further of late,

Away from glorifying child rape and murder as the Bible does?

I certainly hope so.

especially with people like you pushing their agenda.

My agenda of free speech?

You find that objectionable?

We have a rating system on movies, which follows a norm.

Actually, it's wildly uneven in its application, and quite a mysterious process.

Certain words trigger certain ratings.

Idiotic and arbitrary.

Certain acts trigger certain ratings.

See above.

Nudity and the extent of the nudity triggers certain ratings.

See above.

Using these norms, if the section of this book was quoted by an actor in a movie and if this was acted out on screen as the pictures in the book portrays,

But it's a book.

They don't have ratings.

If they did however, the Bible would be NC-17.

it would be rated MA at the least. Not R, but MA.

It's a book.

Not even close and it really isn’t reasonable debateable. I see you enjoy being a contrarian, but this is silly. Please provide specific verses, not just these blanket statements.

Fallacious.

Numerous examples already provided - read the thread, the Bible or Google.

Not a straw man at all.

100% straw.

 

[JoeB131]

For another thread, but it is absolute nonsense that I am voting against my own self-interest by voting for Republicans. Economics aside for the moment, the topic of this thread is a perfect example of why I am voting for the party that best represents my ideals. I have no interest in promoting the lunacy the left promotes.

Right, because you have the nicest double wide in the trailer park, Cleetus, in the state you won't name. And you keep voting for these guys who hate gays and Mexicans, just like Jesus did and wonder why we have less and less of a middle class.

Yeah, we know, you agree with the book. You are on board with all this stuff. You don’t have any children so likely don’t care anyway.

I have nieces and nephews... and frankly, they are certain enough about who they are that a mere book can't make them different. (Ironically, I did have a niece who claimed she was bisexual for a few weeks, but that was just to irritate her Trump-supporting parents.)

ou refer to yourself as cisgender, which is the same as referring to yourself as non-disabled.

Well, you see, here's the thing. I don't see being transgendered as being a disability. Most Trans people are okay with who they are, and can function in society. It's people like you who freak out who are the problem. If anything, we overcompensate to help people with disabilities, from designing public spaces to giving them hiring preferences. Transgender folks aren't asking for anything near that. They just want to use the bathroom they feel comfortable with and for people to use their preferred pronouns.

You have bought into the whole ridiculous narrative that porn is ok for anybody at any age, that a boy can be a girl if he so chooses and that doctors should affirm dysphoria instead of trying to treat it.

Yes, I realize you can't force a transgender to be cis-gendered any more than you can force a minority to be white or a gay person to be straight. Once you realize that, it's just a matter of determining the best treatment.

Frankly, it is sad, but typical of a society that is trending towards being over-run by physiological adults with child-like minds.

Actually, what is sad is you guys wanting to cling on to your bigotries to hate people who aren't really bothering you.

 

[MinTrut]

There are no books in public schools describing homosexual sex to children. You're a gullible idiot if you believe that

Technically, there are, but children can be many ages.

But that doesn't mean many here aren't being hysterical/gullible idiots.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Concur.

We're talking about banning books from school libraries.

Actually, libraries celebrating "Banned Books Week" include books that were questioned or complained about but not taken off the shelves.

So, if they include books not banned, but exclude books that were banned due to where they were banned, it isn't really "Banned Books Week."

They should call it "Books Complained about by Annoying Parents who don't Know their Place" week.

See above.

See above.

I saw nothing above that answered my question about librarians banning books they don't like.