As usual, the left guilty of what they accuse others of

a reply to: datguy

And why do you think Ellen Badassquiat would be sexually exploiting minors?
May we see your creds, please? You've got a link for that as well?

a reply to: Insurrectile

so the "BAN" is total removal from existence? How is that even done?

Or is it as I said, they removed them from school libraries? I realize that changing definitions is all the rage but in this case, I'm not sure it has, just misused.

originally posted by: Insurrectile
a reply to: datguy

And why do you think Ellen Badassquiat would be sexually exploiting minors?
May we see your creds, please? You've got a link for that as well?

This is the problem with the cancel culture. A small group decides what stays or goes. No discussion, no repercussions. Maybe the book you are talking about isn't bad at all, maybe on page 34 it describes how to have anal sex, I don't know. But if it was discussed rationally, then if it did in fact have that info on page 34, I would hope all the parents would agree it's not appropriate for small kids. It's a shame that this even needs to be talked about, it should just be common sense, but from my view, that's not all that common anymore.

a reply to: Insurrectile

actually my comments were directed at you

a reply to: frogs453

This is not the first of this kind of removal. But hey, protect the kids from books, and practice hiding from shooters. Great day in school.

Damn straight protect the kids from some of the garbage books they want in school. Do you really have a problem with that? Are you not able to connect the dots?

If a parent can’t stand in a education board meeting and quote verbatim the contents of these books to the board without them being appalled, disgusted and shutting down the parent, then why the # would you want that book in schools for children? Help me understand your logic because it’s not the first time you’ve gone off on condemning the book ban in “SCHOOLS”. Have you actually read or heard some of the crap in these books? It’s straight up child pornography, teaching children about BJ’s, anal sex, etc……. You seem to be a proponent for having this material available to young children in schools and I’d really like to know why???????

a reply to: network dude

Do I have to make you go through the books in order to find a single example for us or do we have to take your word for everything?
Let's skip the intro, you could also go on to rephrase old books because last century's content is being perceived as too offensive now. Does that mean the right would be guilty of the same thing as well now?

It's a real shame our Free Speech advocates don't see a clear attack on the freedom of expression in that, we could actually find some compromise in basic principles if it was the case. There's some dysfunctional consistency at work that I find fascinating, care to elaborate on that?

originally posted by: Insurrectile
a reply to: network dude

Do I have to make you go through the books in order to find a single example for us or do we have to take your word for everything?
Let's skip the intro, you could also go on to rephrase old books because last century's content is being perceived as too offensive now. Does that mean the right would be guilty of the same thing as well now?

It's a real shame our Free Speech advocates don't see a clear attack on the freedom of expression in that, we could actually find some compromise in basic principles if it was the case. There's some dysfunctional consistency at work that I find fascinating, care to elaborate on that?

I'm not sure how you could miss the point by so much, but congrats, you have amazed me.

This particular book might be just fine, I don't know, I didn't read it, nor did I vote for it's removal. My point was (actually very basic and simple, but whatev) that parents should know what's in these books, and if they aren't appropriate for the kids to read, then they shouldn't be in the library at school. But there should be a discussion, there should be rational adults involved, and dare I say it out loud, there should be COMMON SENSE applied.

Now tell me again what I think.

a reply to: mtnshredder

Excuse me? How about you justify why the book in my post was banned? The book I mentioned has no pornography or LGBT references at all. So why ban Amanda Gorman? Why would a book about the first black baseball player be banned? Why are laws being made so that a young girl cannot discuss her period or ask for a pad or tampon? Why is verbiage being changed such as a book about Rosa Parks noted as "asked to change her seat" with no reasoning why she was not allowed to sit there. Why would verbiage be changed from "slavery" to " involuntarily relocated"? Screech about porn all you want, but this is going much much further than that.

a reply to: network dude

This particular book

This particular person has 17 titles banned, how are parents ever going to find out what's in them when they are banned over some bs pornography accusation nobody in this thread could substantiate?

originally posted by: network dude
They used the FBI to illegally spy on the campaign.

This was 10 times worst than Water Gate where Nixon won 49 out of 50 states, and never needed anything. Water Gate was also not about creating a fake narrative to try and destroy a candidate.

originally posted by: Insurrectile
a reply to: datguy
May we see your creds, please? You've got a link for that as well?

My credentials, not sure who you are so you wont be getting them but I do have links, they do exist, there is information out there in the great wide world to answer your questions.
I will not give them though out of spite for your ignorant complacency towards the sexual exploitation of minors. go find them yourself

In the mean time I will say to everyone else that the contents of the books in question regarding writer Ellen Hopkins were banned over ten years ago.
The topics in said books, are at best questionable for a school audience outside of high school (and probably in high school as well), Kids committing suicide, taking drugs, underage sex ect.
While these books are still available for private purchase they were removed from Texas schools in 2010, I do not yet have any information on current schools that disallow the book.

Context is everything

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: network dude

Sure, but why are some of these being removed from school districts?

these are the two laws specifically in Florida that I think are the ones in question.

H.B. 999
H.B. 1069

While i have been focused in researching other recent laws i have not yet read these entirely.
It is my limited understanding that there is a new directive to the school boards specifically, that orders them to take certain action when books are reported.

I think we can both agree this is where the disconnect lies.
As these are both less than a month old, some individuals have, by law, taken action.
1) its possible the law was "misinterpreted" and I am sure we in Florida will be seeing many appeals as occur regularly with new laws.
2) its possible the actions were taken out of self preservation, perhaps a school board member saw the "report" and took action to ensure they did not lose their job, erring on the side of caution
3) its possible the actions were planned and nefarious
4) all of the above

I hope this sheds some light on your questions, sorry i could not give a definitive answer

Edit to add: it should also be noted that these are not new laws themselves but amendments to existing laws

a reply to: datguy

Sure, but the point is, contrary to claims here, books are being banned and changed. Well beyond pornography. I mean and in regard to "pornography",
the Bible should most certainly be banned as laying with their father and talking about taking lovers whose member was the size of donkeys and ejaculated like horses as is in Ezekiel should be enough right? And I don't see anyone on the "right" upset about books such as I mentioned being banned,that unless it's really just about banning black authors? Possibly, since again there are no complaints about it. Just cheering it on all over social media.

So I'm sorry, laws that are putting women's lives at risk, risk of jail, girls not allowed to speak about periods, a heterosexual teacher allowed to have a photo of her family but a homesexual teacher is not. Banning curriculum for adults in college, banning all sorts of books, changing verbiage in books. Meanwhile, just letting children be slaughtered in school.

Yeah, definitely extremely concerning to the majority of Americans. As seen in the most recent midterm elections.

a reply to: frogs453

Legally, books are not being banned, this is media hyperbole based on political bias/agenda, and has been going for decades, so why the attention now all of a sudden? Elections...next year new debate all of a sudden no one cares about the books anymore. And both sides are guilty, its not just left or right.

The bible shouldn't be taught in schools, I guess with the exception of a parochial or catholic school.
It only teaches hate and has been changed too many times to count, to be accurate.

You make good points but are you willing to listen to the other side of the coin?
What's wrong with wanting to protect children in the womb? are ALL women's lives at risk due to this?
Not sure about the case with teachers photos, I do know that H.B. 1557 does NOT ban any such thing.
H.B. 1557 "Parents rights in education" AKA "dont say gay"

And dont get me started ranting about how our corrupt and decietful politicians and political division for decades is the root cause for our kids being slaughtered in school.
Everyone screams "the guns the guns" because they refuse to address the REAL cause for these REACTIONS...are ignorant people who cant pull their sycophant heads out of their political idol's asses long enough to realize that fighting at school football games, and over the item at a store, or because you looked at someone.

Its all of them on both sides, our political leaders have failed for decades and they all need to go the way of the dodo

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: mtnshredder

Excuse me? How about you justify why the book in my post was banned? The book I mentioned has no pornography or LGBT references at all. So why ban Amanda Gorman? Why would a book about the first black baseball player be banned? Why are laws being made so that a young girl cannot discuss her period or ask for a pad or tampon? Why is verbiage being changed such as a book about Rosa Parks noted as "asked to change her seat" with no reasoning why she was not allowed to sit there. Why would verbiage be changed from "slavery" to " involuntarily relocated"? Screech about porn all you want, but this is going much much further than that.

You obviously haven’t read the content of the books because yeah some of it is straight up pornography but you tend to gloss over that fact and strawman instead. You still haven’t answered my questions as to why you support pornographic material being available to children at schools. They’re not just talking about periods and tampons🙄

originally posted by: network dude
www.foxnews.com...

The Durham report suggests there are more questions about Hillary Clinton's overtures toward Russian entities than former President Donald Trump's, Victor Davis Hanson claimed.

Hanson, a historian and fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, told "Life, Liberty & Levin" that Durham's findings showed that "far from being a Trump-Russian connection, there was a Hillary-Clinton–Russian connection."

Hanson analyzed the findings, saying they showed Clinton was using a Moscow-based "source," Democrat-linked PR executive Charles Dolan Jr., to collect purported intelligence on Trump.

as more people read the Durham report and less people just take the MSM's word for it, more people are realizing that most of what was claimed to be "TRUMP!" was actually Hillary. She colluded with Russians to get the Russian dirt on Trump. Sure it was made up, but it sounded good for her base, and as long as all of it could be used to brainwash the viewers into hating him with every fiber of their being, the plan would work. And it almost did. Except for one thing. The human ability to reason. Enough people saw through the lies and stood up against the machine. They threw tantrums, spit at the screen while screaming how horrible Trump was. And his supporters and some normal folk just weren't buying it. They wanted facts, proof. And even Adam Schiff couldn't find the proof he claimed was all over.

They used the FBI to illegally spy on the campaign.
That one is still contested to this day. fact checkers will deny it. But Carter Page was in Trump's campaign, and the FISA warrants were used to spy on him. Clinesmith altered documents to make sure Page looked like an foreign agent, when in fact he was working with the FBI. And then there was the great "unmasking" fiasco. Were the two things linked? Yep, so once you grasp all the facts, it's not possible to come to any other conclusion than Trump was right, and Obama was spying on his campaign.

This is why Trump even has a base today. Because the people who like things to be fair, had enough. I'd wager if Trump was treated fairly, he would have a much smaller base. he would have had to stand on the merits of his work. Which the action portion of his work was fine, but better than most. But the speaking part was less than desirable. He angered many because of his lack of filter. Some like that, but as the ambassador for our nation, the projection of cohesive thought is very important, and that is something he wasn't good at. In his business world that was an asset, as a politician, it was a liability. That is my personal opinion.

But this same movie is played out mostly the same way, over and over again. But when you have an outsider, it can be problematic, and it was.
if you think nothing more of Trump, remember that because he wasn't an inside player, he didn't know who he wasn't allowed to piss off, so he did it to everyone. And some really scummy truths were learned.

Interesting article, coming from a news network with owners and board members who like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden, more than Donald Trump.

originally posted by: mtnshredder

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: mtnshredder

Excuse me? How about you justify why the book in my post was banned? The book I mentioned has no pornography or LGBT references at all. So why ban Amanda Gorman? Why would a book about the first black baseball player be banned? Why are laws being made so that a young girl cannot discuss her period or ask for a pad or tampon? Why is verbiage being changed such as a book about Rosa Parks noted as "asked to change her seat" with no reasoning why she was not allowed to sit there. Why would verbiage be changed from "slavery" to " involuntarily relocated"? Screech about porn all you want, but this is going much much further than that.

You obviously haven’t read the content of the books because yeah some of it is straight up pornography but you tend to gloss over that fact and strawman instead. You still haven’t answered my questions as to why you support pornographic material being available to children at schools. They’re not just talking about periods and tampons🙄

Have I objected to pornography being banned? No. As a matter of fact I think the Bible should be added as well.

I have noticed that absolutely no one can explain why the examples I gave have been banned. And not one of them has sexual references at all. They just happen to be either by a black author or about black historic figures.

The ban has gone wayyyy beyond pornography.

originally posted by: Insurrectile
a reply to: network dude

This particular book

This particular person has 17 titles banned, how are parents ever going to find out what's in them when they are banned over some bs pornography accusation nobody in this thread could substantiate?

well, if they are banned, then nobody will ever know what's in them. Or is it possible you haven't a clue what "ban" means in this context?

the left is guilty? That’s about the funniest Goddamn thing I’ve ever read on this message boards.

Was Trump planning to build a hotel in Moscow, yes or no. Did he say I have no business ties with Russia over and over and over and over again during the election, yes or no.

Was Hillary Clinton running a child sex trafficking ring out of the basement of a pizza joint in New York, yes or no.

Did trumps campaign manager give polling information on US citizens to Russia, yes or no.

Were loads of Russians sanctioned by Mueller, yes or no.

Was anyone indicted after the Durham report came out, yes or no.

😘