@techsouth saidWell that’s because you’re a reality denying / lying right wing Republican.
It seems obvious to me that Democrats are the authoritarian ones. And it's not even close.
@suzianne saidI can envision a productive conversation occurring. It would start something like this...
So, no books that YOU don't like. Got it.
So it's got nothing to do with "for the children". Okay. Unless you don't like your kids, who are already as ignorant as you, accessing new ideas. Is this because you don't trust your strict indoctrinational upbringing to keep them from "turning gay", or from finally doing something to relieve their stress from being born into ...[text shortened]... little "mini-me"s. They have their own personhood, whether that scares the crap out of you or not.
We all agree that there are some books that children should not have access to without parental approval. Since we obviously won't agree on everything, let's pursue a methodology that will require some compromises and move forward.
But what we have instead is the left starts by grossly mischaracterizing parental concerns as if they were exactly the same as Nazi book burning. I've pointed that here on RHP and you seemingly stand by the trope Nazi book burning comparison, but also grossly mischaracterize things I've said.
First of all you say So, no books that YOU don't like. Got it. When did I say that? Seriously, point to the sentence where you think you read that.
Do you actually think I don't realize that some would disagree with my preferences? In fact, I am certain that if I had a list of all proposed books to ban made by people on the right, I would disagree with some of them. But that is a secondary conversation. The primary point I came here to make is that ALL of us agree that some books should be excluded from children's libraries (except perhaps for groomers).
And you don't know me nor my children. Yet you are hysterical that I may not be treating them right because I made a very modest point. Again, my point is that we ALL agree that some books should be excluded from children's libraries, let's stop pretending like that is identical to 1930s Nazi book burning.
Are there any set of words I could write to make the above point that doesn't result in me being accused of having said that I should be in charge of picking books to be banned? I clearly have not said that here.
FWIW: I didn't allow my children to read the Kama Sutra when they were 5. And when they were 8, I wouldn't have allowed them to read erotic fiction. I would kind of prefer that this not be available in their elementary school's library. If you want that for your kids and need it in their school library because can't afford to supply it yourself, I understand your difficulty. Please forgive me for not ensuring my kids have access "new ideas" the same as you.
@techsouth saidCould that productive discussion include an acknowledgement that the state of Florida banned a bunch of books from public schools that don't remotely qualify as porn?
I can envision a productive conversation occurring. It would start something like this...
We all agree that there are some books that children should not have access to without parental approval. Since we obviously won't agree on everything, let's pursue a methodology that will require some compromises and move forward.
But what we have instead is the left st ...[text shortened]... our difficulty. Please forgive me for not ensuring my kids have access "new ideas" the same as you.
And that maybe the decisions about what specific books should be in schools and libraries shouldn't be left up to politicians?
@wildgrass saidSo you are in agreement that comparing the removal of books from children's libraries is NOT the same as Nazi censorship?
You know what they say: If it doesn't fit your argument to compare apples to apples, then you can always compare apples to Nazis. In recent history, libs and conservatives alike have been using 'banning' and 'censored' to describe the removal of materials from certain venues.
That's all I was saying.
If conservatives accuse liberals of Nazi-ism when it doesn't apply, then they should stop doing that too.
I don't know about others, but when I post here on RHP, my intention is not to pledge open ended continual debate of all tangents that may stem from the point I make, nor is it a pledge to support any and all positions taken by someone seemingly in my "camp" in regards to politics.
If there were 100s of books proposed to be removed, I'm pretty sure if I went through that list I'd not agree with all of them. Now what? Are we now required to go through the list together and insult each other (or other people) on each and every opinion?
There are more than 20 million people living in Florida. Are we supposed to be surprised that not all of them agree on all books that either should be or should not be in children's libraries? Do you picture me sitting here with my whole world view crumbling because among 20 million people there are differences of opinion, or a few choices difficult to explain?
I posted here on RHP with a very modest point that I really think everyone would agree with if they were someone forced to think about it rather than resort to slogans. That point again is that we ALL agree that some books should not be in children's libraries, and that consequently we should stop with this mindless, slogan based thinking, trope about Nazi-like censorship.
2 edits
@techsouth saidWe don't need everyone to agree on everything. Obviously. That's why we hire teachers and librarians and put together school boards that have the kids' parents in them.
So you are in agreement that comparing the removal of books from children's libraries is NOT the same as Nazi censorship?
That's all I was saying.
If conservatives accuse liberals of Nazi-ism when it doesn't apply, then they should stop doing that too.
I don't know about others, but when I post here on RHP, my intention is not to pledge open ended continual debate ...[text shortened]... equently we should stop with this mindless, slogan based thinking, trope about Nazi-like censorship.
Don't give politicians the power to decide. Ron is wrong. They use the worst examples in the arguments, but the scope of bans are much wider. The Nazi reference is what happens when we give government too much power for too long. They love culture wars.
@wildgrass saidI actually entered this conversation with a much more modest goal. That goal was to argue that the trope Nazi-censorship comparisons were misapplied.
Could that productive discussion include an acknowledgement that the state of Florida banned a bunch of books from public schools that don't remotely qualify as porn?
And that maybe the decisions about what specific books should be in schools and libraries shouldn't be left up to politicians?
You're request is that we cannot agree on that unless we expand the debate into less trivial points of contention. It seems like the easiest approach is to get the simplest things out of the way first, and then worry about more complex issues.
I have already said that I do not expect I would agree with all choices that may have been made. Believe it or not, I have not read all the 100s of books in question.
First of all, I am not willing to stipulate that porn is the only category that should be left out of children's libraries. Maybe KKK recruiting manuals should be left out too? Books that glorify mass murder? Books that deny the Holocaust? Your call.
But most of all, I have taken a modest approach because the specifics will be ever changing. We're all mad at Florida for the books they have removed, what happens when Utah makes their on list of books to remove? Do we have to review the specifics of those books before we can have an opinion on this silly Nazi-comparison? Why can't we just agree that Nazi comparisons are not applicable without delving into all the specifics?
New books are published every day and some of them are going to be kept out of school libraries. Doesn't it make sense that we should discuss the process for removing books in the abstract even if we don't know anything about the specific books we'll have to work with?
And is it also a minimum that we know who should be in charge of removing books from children's library before we even discuss the idea of removing them? I can see there are some downsides when politicians decide. Who do you propose DOES get to decide? The Proud Boys? BLM? Maybe politicians don't get to decide, but they get to appoint the people that do decide? I know the perfect solution is obvious to you, but this seems like it's rather difficult to me and that nothing is going to be perfect.
But one thing no one here has yet disagreed with, and yet everyone seems to want to argue against it anyway without actually disagreeing is that ALL of us understand that some books should not be in children's libraries.
@wildgrass saidAren't school boards composed of politicians?
We don't need everyone to agree on everything. Obviously. That's why we hire teachers and librarians and put together school boards that have the kids' parents in them.
Don't give politicians the power to decide. Ron is wrong. They use the worst examples in the arguments, but the scope of bans are much wider. The Nazi reference is what happens when we give government too much power for too long. They love culture wars.
Is it a requirement to be a parent to be on a school board?
Isn't Ron DeSantis some kids' parent?
Since Ron DeSantis has kids and some school board members do not, should DeSantis overrule them?
It is my understanding that librarians are forced to include some books. Librarians and teachers only have a say if the school board lets them have a say, which is about the same as not having any say.
What if the majority of parents want a book removed but the school board disagrees?
You have crafted a sentence to make it sound like the parents have authority, but I don't see how they have any authority other than to vote for politicians who do have the authority.
@averagejoe1 saidPhranny. They are not banning books. Some age restrictions of course, which you cannot disapprove of, like the ones that say I have a strap-on, and I can't wait until your weenye is.....
Phranny...........no books have been banned. Look again. YOu apparently dont know the def of banning books.
SO, y'all bore us with the banning posts.
1 edit
@techsouth saidNo, no, yes, no. There's a process.
Aren't school boards composed of politicians?
Is it a requirement to be a parent to be on a school board?
Isn't Ron DeSantis some kids' parent?
Since Ron DeSantis has kids and some school board members do not, should DeSantis overrule them?
It is my understanding that librarians are forced to include some books. Librarians and teachers only have a say if the sc ...[text shortened]... don't see how they have any authority other than to vote for politicians who do have the authority.
We hire the librarians and the teachers to make decisions. They are professionals, taught and trained to understand and their job every day is to think about what kids need in schools. Decentralize. Let Ron desantis parent his own kids, not the whole state of Florida. Yeesh. You start to sound authoritarian as you step through the logic of your argument. You need to ban pornography to protect your kid, but cannot admit that among the hundreds of books that desantis banned from schools, only one in cartoon form might fit that category. It's hardly a good example of what Suzianne was describing. It's the other books that Ron banned that illustrates the societal problem of authoritarian-thinking government rules.
1 edit
@techsouth said
I actually entered this conversation with a much more modest goal. That goal was to argue that the trope Nazi-censorship comparisons were misapplied.
You're request is that we cannot agree on that unless we expand the debate into less trivial points of contention. It seems like the easiest approach is to get the simplest things out of the way first, and then worry abou ...[text shortened]... ally disagreeing is that ALL of us understand that some books should not be in children's libraries.
But one thing no one here has yet disagreed with, and yet everyone seems to want to argue against it anyway without actually disagreeing is that ALL of us understand that some books should not be in children's libraries.
Wrong. No one argues against it. You argue with yourself, use the obvious to make a boring point. The vast, vast majority of books being removed from Florida schools due to increased government regulation are not porn. They're perfectly normal books but the government feels that the topic is too divisive.
@suzianne saidSo you have mother experience? You sit down with them for their 6-yr old suggestions, and wants, and comments? For me, if I did not 'agree' (ugh) with the child, I would tell them tough. They'd be lucky if that were my only response.
So, no books that YOU don't like. Got it.
So it's got nothing to do with "for the children". Okay. Unless you don't like your kids, who are already as ignorant as you, accessing new ideas. Is this because you don't trust your strict indoctrinational upbringing to keep them from "turning gay", or from finally doing something to relieve their stress from being born into ...[text shortened]... little "mini-me"s. They have their own personhood, whether that scares the crap out of you or not.
@averagejoe1 saidRon desantis' office put out a press release saying they had removed 175 books from public schools. You can look it up.
Phranny. They are not banning books. Some age restrictions of course, which you cannot disapprove of, like the ones that say I have a strap-on, and I can't wait until your weenye is.....
SO, y'all bore us with the banning posts.