Conservative Ideology: A Big Lie

[MDlaxfan76]

Bring it on Marjorie:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/21/politics ... index.html

[cradleandshoot]

I made reference to an elementary school. My 9 year old attends an elementary school for 3rd, 4th and 5th graders. He's in 4th grade. I don't know many kids in 4th who have a smart phone. My son's computer access is somewhat limited by the amount of time we allow him to be on a computer and the access his school allows on their devices.

My daughter doesn't have a smart phone, either. But think about how life was when we were kids.

I have friends who are giving their kids 5G flip phones (I have one for myself)
They can ph & text but can't access social media.

Same. My point is: think older brothers and sisters who do indeed have access.

....same as it was for all of us as kids when it came to anything verboten like R movies etc.

Heck, when I was a kid? George Carlin on vinyl was verboten for most households, let alone Richard Pryor. Yet we got 'em somehow.....

George Carlin and Cheech and Chong caused parents in the 70s an enormous amount of stress. " It's me Dave, open up I got the stuff. Dave's not here man" When all your dreams go up in smoke... If parents were REALLY lucky their children never listened to the Dirty Doctor. I found out recently that John Valby is still as popular today with college students as he was 40 plus years ago.

Ohhh eat bite suck f**k gobble nibble chew, nipple bosom hair pie finger f**k screw. Valby use to say that within the first 5 minutes of his performance he had just offended everybody in the audience. I'm still amazed that in the world political correctness that all of these years later young college students still gravitate towards the dirty doctor. I posted a link years ago on the old forum to Lax Fidelis. He was totally appalled at the crassness and vulgarity. How a guy with a PhD in classical music and piano from Cornell becomes so popular with his dirty little ditties among young college students use to make Valby say...my parents are so proud of me...

100%. You used to HIDE these albums from your parents back in the day. My how times have changed......

No sir, I had an autographed copy of his album I purchased at his show at the Red Creek in Rochester way back around 1978 when several dozen people stood up and walked out because they were offended. Dr Dirt stopped singing looked at them and said something like get the eff out of here we didn't want you here anyways. I don't remember how Dr Dirt signed my album. I will ALWAYS remember how he autographedy buddies album... To Jim and his quivering quim.... You are correct, I never would have played that record on my stereo at home. I use to always bust his chops and call him quim instead of Jim. It was an inside joke we couldn't explain to anyone. It was easier to say long drunken story.

[Typical Lax Dad]

What are the odds that something like this would be shown in classrooms today?

[Typical Lax Dad]

[CU88a]

Tony Gonzales (R-TX) went further, telling Dana Bash of CNN on Sunday: “It’s my absolute honor to be in Congress, but I serve with some real scumbags. Matt Gaetz [R-FL], he paid minors to have sex with him at drug parties. Bob Good [R-VA] endorsed my opponent, a known neo-Nazi. These people used to walk around with white hoods at night. Now they’re walking around with white hoods in the daytime.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/gop-lawma ... s?ref=wrap

[Seacoaster(1)]

Titter tatter from the GOP House. Kind of amusing until you realize that these children are Congressmen and Congresswomen:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... reign-aid/

"The House came together Saturday to pass a sweeping $95 billion foreign aid package, a rare moment of bipartisan cooperation in the closely divided chamber. But the move only intensified infighting among House Republicans, who split sharply on the strategy to deliver assistance to foreign allies including Ukraine and Israel.

In social media posts and TV interviews afterward, House Republicans took aim at one another — in unusually sharp terms — over the events that led up to the vote. Ultimately, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) had to rely on a majority of Democrats to push through the most controversial piece of the package — $60 billion in aid to Ukraine for its war against Russia — in a gamble that could cost him his speakership.

“It’s my absolute honor to be in Congress, but I serve with some real scumbags,” Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Tex.) said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union,” calling out two GOP colleagues — Reps. Matt Gaetz (Fla.) and Bob Good (Va.) — who have broken with Johnson and voted against other legislation proposed by the GOP majority.

Gaetz and Good have also endorsed Gonzales’s primary challenger, something Johnson has warned members against doing. Gonzales’s CNN comments prompted a third hard-line GOP colleague, Rep. Elijah Crane (Ariz.), to announce his support for Gonzales’s opponent, Brandon Herrera, a gun enthusiast with a large YouTube following.

Most House Republicans have grown weary of colleagues who consistently vote against legislation that must be addressed rather than work to seek compromise within the party. Since eight Republicans voted with all Democrats to oust then-speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), more pragmatic Republicans have become irate at the “no” bloc of the conference and encouraged GOP leadership to punish those members.

Hard-liners argue that as the majority party Republicans should push for ideological purity and take a firm stand in negotiations to exert concessions from a Democratic-led Senate and White House. But in voting against conservative measures they do not believe go far enough, other Republicans say, hard-liners are weakening Johnson’s hand in negotiations because the conference is not united around a set of demands.

The hard-line bloc has long objected to considering further Ukraine aid without legislation to secure American borders. In a nod to such demands, Johnson proposed voting on a border security bill on Saturday that largely mirrors a tough conservative proposal House Republicans passed last year. But in protest of Johnson’s foreign aid proposal, three hard-liners on the House Rules Committee — GOP Reps. Chip Roy (Tex.), Ralph Norman (S.C.) and Thomas Massie (Ky.) — prevented the bill from being considered under rules that would require only a simple majority for passage.

Other Republicans urged Johnson to still put the bill up for a vote under rules that would require two-thirds of the House for passage. The measure fell short.

“Those who voted to fund Ukraine’s borders instead of America’s KNEW for certainty that the separate (unattached to Ukraine) border security was going to die in the Senate, and are now dying for cover — so they’re casting blame,” Roy said after the vote on X. “Own it.”

Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) shot back at Roy on X, saying the “isolationist Republicans” were standing in the way of at least forcing Senate Democrats to take a politically difficult vote on border security.

Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.) came to Roy’s defense.

“After each sellout, once the fury of Republican voters sets in, the self-serving lies begin,” Bishop said in his own post directed at Barr.

Massie told Barr, a fellow Kentucky Republican, to “quit blaming conservatives for your votes.”

The intraparty fights have spilled over on to the campaign trail, where Gaetz has taken the lead in ignoring Johnson’s warnings and campaigning against GOP colleagues. Gaetz visited San Antonio last month to hold a rally with Herrera where he bashed Gonzales and pushed for a more aggressive GOP conference.

There is no love lost with Gonzales.

“Matt Gaetz, he paid minors to have sex with him at drug parties,” Gonzales claimed Sunday, referencing allegations against Gaetz that the Department of Justice investigated but declined to prosecute last year.

The House Ethics Committee is still investigating Gaetz, who has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing and said Sunday on X that Gonzales was “laundering lies on CNN.”

Gonzales also targeted Good for his support of Herrera, apparently referencing a report by Jewish Insider that cited instances of Herrera posting videos “replete with imagery, music and jokes about the Nazi regime and the Holocaust.”

“Bob Good endorsed my opponent, a known neo-Nazi,” Gonzales said. “These people used to walk around with white hoods at night; now they’re walking around with white hoods in the daytime.”

After Gonzales’s CNN interview, Herrera objected to the congressman’s characterization of him as a “neo-Nazi,” writing on X: “This is the death spiral ladies and gentlemen. He has to cry to his liberal friends about me, because Republicans won’t listen anymore.”

For Johnson, the infighting looms over his fate as speaker.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) had promised to try to remove Johnson from the speakership if he moved Ukraine aid, but she held back in hopes that her colleagues hear from angry constituents before returning to Washington.

Massie, who co-sponsored Greene’s resolution to oust Johnson, said he hopes Johnson resigns and predicted that if he does not, someone could trigger a “motion to vacate” even though much of the Republican conference does not want to devolve into chaos again.

In a tense Tuesday evening meeting with Johnson and several rank-and-file Republicans, Gaetz told the speaker that if he moved ahead with his foreign aid plan that GOP colleagues would seek to oust him. He also threatened others in the room, saying the far-right bloc would target them on social media and campaign against them.

Meanwhile, some GOP critics of the hard-line faction have advocated for leadership to take harsher measures against the bloc.

Last week during a meeting with the speaker and lawmakers of the conservative Main Street Caucus, who prioritize governing, conversations revolved around how to punish members based on what could improve House functions. Several members suggested removing the three hard-liners — Roy, Massie and Norman — who sit on the House Rules Committee.

Johnson did not announce any decision whether on whether to follow through with that proposed plan., which many members from that meeting acknowledged is easier said than done since far-right members fundraise successfully off being targeted by “the establishment.”

[Brooklyn]

The answer could not be more obvious.

[jhu72]

The answer could not be more obvious.

I guess fascist organizations are protected by YOUTUBE.

[Brooklyn]

YT has been criticized for its inconsistencies. A lesson to be learned by all such mediums. Hopefully, some day they'll all change for the better.

[ohmilax34]

Is this the country we want to live in??

Red states threaten librarians with prison — as blue states work to protect them

Sam Lee, a leader of the Connecticut Library Association, heads to work these days torn between hope and fear.

She’s encouraged because legislators in her state proposed a bill this year making it harder for school boards to ban library books. But she’s fearful because Connecticut, like America, is seeing a sustained surge in book challenges — and she wonders if objectors will see the legislation as a reason to file more complaints.

“I would like to be optimistic,” Lee said. “But having been in my position for the last few years … I don’t know, it really feels like it’s been forever. And I am worried the book banners are just going to be emboldened.”

The bill in Connecticut, pending before an education committee, is one of a raft of measures advancing nationwide that seek to do things like prohibit book bans or forbid the harassment of school and public librarians — the first such wave in the country, said John Chrastka, director of library advocacy group EveryLibrary. Legislators in 22 mostly blue states have proposed 57 such bills so far this year, and two have become law, according to a Washington Post analysis of state legislative databases and an EveryLibrary legislative tracker.

But the library-friendly measures are being outpaced by bills in mostly red states that aim to restrict which books libraries can offer and threaten librarians with prison or thousands in fines for handing out “obscene” or “harmful” titles. At least 27 states are considering 100 such bills this year, three of which have become law, The Post found. That adds to nearly a dozen similar measures enacted over the last three years across 10 states.

Lawmakers proposing restrictive bills contend they are necessary because school and public libraries contain graphic sexual material that should not be available to children. Some books’ “sole purpose is sexual gratification,” said West Virginia Del. Brandon Steele (R), who introduced a bill that would allow librarians to be prosecuted for giving obscene titles to minors.

..

I don't have a good answer to your question, but I'm hoping to understand this better to form my answer.

In your view, or anyone else who wants to chime in, could there be a book so obscene or bad in any other way that we would want to 1) ban it from schools or libraries or 2) prosecute a librarian for providing the book to a minor?

Should the number of banned books always be zero?

What do we call it if an adult book (with depictions of sex or violence) is in an elementary school library and people complain about that. Are they in favor of censorship and banning books? Can we compare them to nazis? Is there a different way to describe that?

These are actual questions, not rhetorical ones.

Easy answer: it's 2024, not 1950. Your kids can access EVERYTHING, and i mean EVERYTHING just with their smart phones. Images, videos, hate-mongering....all the best, and very much the worst, that the world has to offer.

The idea here is that we should worry about a kid picking up an actual, physical book in 2024?

Either these parents don't have kids, or they have no clue what "the internet" is. In either case, let the professional librarians that we pay sort it out. And more books are ALWAYS better than less....this America, not Russia or North Korea. Let THOSE chaps ban all the books they want. We're supposed to be better than that.

I made reference to an elementary school. My 9 year old attends an elementary school for 3rd, 4th and 5th graders. He's in 4th grade. I don't know many kids in 4th who have a smart phone. My son's computer access is somewhat limited by the amount of time we allow him to be on a computer and the access his school allows on their devices.

So, in my own life, if my son’s school’s librarian gave my son a book with graphic sexual content I would complain to the principal. Is that unreasonable?

You have every right to complain to the Principal as it may allow them to implement a better system for what is or what isn’t appropriate for particular children if a child requests a book. A legitimate question: Do believe that book should be banned if it’s not “pornography” if you find it inappropriate for your child?

Thank you for the thoughtful discussion. I guess I'm trying to understand what it means for a book to be "banned". If I complain and the book is removed from the elementary library, did I/we just ban a book? Will it show up on "banned book lists" and be used to prove that conservatives are wacky religious nuts?

To answer your question...if I think the book is just an adult book with graphic sex and violence that, imo, isn't appropriate for a 9 year old, I would complain that it is in an elementary school library. I wouldn't want it removed from all libraries everywhere.

I would also wonder why the librarian is, in this scenario, personally suggesting the book to my 9 year old. I realize I'm coming up with an extreme example. I think I'm trying to find some common ground.

I think that’s an entirely reasonable and indeed quite normal response to an explicit graphic sex book in an early elementary school library. Fortunately, I think we probably would find such to be extremely rare, as librarians would be very unlikely to allow or promote such.

If one had that extreme situation, I’d start with a civil discussion with the librarian to find out what logic or information I might be missing. If I found the response to be uncivil or otherwise unsatisfactory I’d meet with the principal to make sure they knew of the situation. I’d have strong confidence that any such extreme situation would be properly addressed, at a minimum keeping such material away from open access with out supervision, including my own preferences for my specific child. If not, I might move my child.

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too. Whether related to gender or sexuality or to history, angry biases of the few are seeking control of everyone.

I don’t think book bans are ever the right answer for any public institutions, all the more so when there are common sense approaches which are far less draconian and far less intrusive to other parents’ preferences.

MD, my apologies for neglecting this discussion. I started up a discussion when I knew I had a lot on my plate personally, and I probably should've just held off until I knew I had more time to devote to this. I appreciate your response.

I believe you when you state

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too.

but I wonder if those parents are being driven to this by more than just following far right personalities online. I have no specific example, but I could see parents taking big actions if they feel that their child's school is trying to instill values that go against the parent's values.

[MDlaxfan76]

Is this the country we want to live in??

Red states threaten librarians with prison — as blue states work to protect them

Sam Lee, a leader of the Connecticut Library Association, heads to work these days torn between hope and fear.

She’s encouraged because legislators in her state proposed a bill this year making it harder for school boards to ban library books. But she’s fearful because Connecticut, like America, is seeing a sustained surge in book challenges — and she wonders if objectors will see the legislation as a reason to file more complaints.

“I would like to be optimistic,” Lee said. “But having been in my position for the last few years … I don’t know, it really feels like it’s been forever. And I am worried the book banners are just going to be emboldened.”

The bill in Connecticut, pending before an education committee, is one of a raft of measures advancing nationwide that seek to do things like prohibit book bans or forbid the harassment of school and public librarians — the first such wave in the country, said John Chrastka, director of library advocacy group EveryLibrary. Legislators in 22 mostly blue states have proposed 57 such bills so far this year, and two have become law, according to a Washington Post analysis of state legislative databases and an EveryLibrary legislative tracker.

But the library-friendly measures are being outpaced by bills in mostly red states that aim to restrict which books libraries can offer and threaten librarians with prison or thousands in fines for handing out “obscene” or “harmful” titles. At least 27 states are considering 100 such bills this year, three of which have become law, The Post found. That adds to nearly a dozen similar measures enacted over the last three years across 10 states.

Lawmakers proposing restrictive bills contend they are necessary because school and public libraries contain graphic sexual material that should not be available to children. Some books’ “sole purpose is sexual gratification,” said West Virginia Del. Brandon Steele (R), who introduced a bill that would allow librarians to be prosecuted for giving obscene titles to minors.

..

I don't have a good answer to your question, but I'm hoping to understand this better to form my answer.

In your view, or anyone else who wants to chime in, could there be a book so obscene or bad in any other way that we would want to 1) ban it from schools or libraries or 2) prosecute a librarian for providing the book to a minor?

Should the number of banned books always be zero?

What do we call it if an adult book (with depictions of sex or violence) is in an elementary school library and people complain about that. Are they in favor of censorship and banning books? Can we compare them to nazis? Is there a different way to describe that?

These are actual questions, not rhetorical ones.

Easy answer: it's 2024, not 1950. Your kids can access EVERYTHING, and i mean EVERYTHING just with their smart phones. Images, videos, hate-mongering....all the best, and very much the worst, that the world has to offer.

The idea here is that we should worry about a kid picking up an actual, physical book in 2024?

Either these parents don't have kids, or they have no clue what "the internet" is. In either case, let the professional librarians that we pay sort it out. And more books are ALWAYS better than less....this America, not Russia or North Korea. Let THOSE chaps ban all the books they want. We're supposed to be better than that.

I made reference to an elementary school. My 9 year old attends an elementary school for 3rd, 4th and 5th graders. He's in 4th grade. I don't know many kids in 4th who have a smart phone. My son's computer access is somewhat limited by the amount of time we allow him to be on a computer and the access his school allows on their devices.

So, in my own life, if my son’s school’s librarian gave my son a book with graphic sexual content I would complain to the principal. Is that unreasonable?

You have every right to complain to the Principal as it may allow them to implement a better system for what is or what isn’t appropriate for particular children if a child requests a book. A legitimate question: Do believe that book should be banned if it’s not “pornography” if you find it inappropriate for your child?

Thank you for the thoughtful discussion. I guess I'm trying to understand what it means for a book to be "banned". If I complain and the book is removed from the elementary library, did I/we just ban a book? Will it show up on "banned book lists" and be used to prove that conservatives are wacky religious nuts?

To answer your question...if I think the book is just an adult book with graphic sex and violence that, imo, isn't appropriate for a 9 year old, I would complain that it is in an elementary school library. I wouldn't want it removed from all libraries everywhere.

I would also wonder why the librarian is, in this scenario, personally suggesting the book to my 9 year old. I realize I'm coming up with an extreme example. I think I'm trying to find some common ground.

I think that’s an entirely reasonable and indeed quite normal response to an explicit graphic sex book in an early elementary school library. Fortunately, I think we probably would find such to be extremely rare, as librarians would be very unlikely to allow or promote such.

If one had that extreme situation, I’d start with a civil discussion with the librarian to find out what logic or information I might be missing. If I found the response to be uncivil or otherwise unsatisfactory I’d meet with the principal to make sure they knew of the situation. I’d have strong confidence that any such extreme situation would be properly addressed, at a minimum keeping such material away from open access with out supervision, including my own preferences for my specific child. If not, I might move my child.

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too. Whether related to gender or sexuality or to history, angry biases of the few are seeking control of everyone.

I don’t think book bans are ever the right answer for any public institutions, all the more so when there are common sense approaches which are far less draconian and far less intrusive to other parents’ preferences.

MD, my apologies for neglecting this discussion. I started up a discussion when I knew I had a lot on my plate personally, and I probably should've just held off until I knew I had more time to devote to this. I appreciate your response.

I believe you when you state

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too.

but I wonder if those parents are being driven to this by more than just following far right personalities online. I have no specific example, but I could see parents taking big actions if they feel that their child's school is trying to instill values that go against the parent's values.

They often feel morally outraged and righteous in their efforts to dictate, but we know there are interests actively attempting to get them worked up and those interests have every incentive to grossly exaggerate.

However, you are absolutely correct... it need not be 'far right personalities online'.

It could well be church leaders whipping people up, neighbors and friends doing so, as well as outright charlatans, etc. Longstanding grift to get folks worked up about "values", "There's trouble in River City..."

But yes, there's a heck of a lot of online, cable and political 'personalities' involved in getting people worked up. And the foreign authoritarian interests are involved online as well, with this being one of the areas they see benefit in sowing misinformation and division.

The question is not so much whether or not a child is actually exposed to ideas that make some parents uncomfortable or even offended, because that's undoubtedly the case, but rather whether the parents who feel that way should be able to dictate what all the other parents' children get to learn.

And that's where the problem lies, beyond the source of the efforts to get people worked up.

[PizzaSnake]

MD, my apologies for neglecting this discussion. I started up a discussion when I knew I had a lot on my plate personally, and I probably should've just held off until I knew I had more time to devote to this. I appreciate your response.

I believe you when you state

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too.

but I wonder if those parents are being driven to this by more than just following far right personalities online. I have no specific example, but I could see parents taking big actions if they feel that their child's school is trying to instill values that go against the parent's values.

They often feel morally outraged and righteous in their efforts to dictate, but we know there are interests actively attempting to get them worked up and those interests have every incentive to grossly exaggerate.

However, you are absolutely correct... it need not be 'far right personalities online'.

It could well be church leaders whipping people up, neighbors and friends doing so, as well as outright charlatans, etc. Longstanding grift to get folks worked up about "values", "There's trouble in River City..."

But yes, there's a heck of a lot of online, cable and political 'personalities' involved in getting people worked up. And the foreign authoritarian interests are involved online as well, with this being one of the areas they see benefit in sowing misinformation and division.

The question is not so much whether or not a child is actually exposed to ideas that make some parents uncomfortable or even offended, because that's undoubtedly the case, but rather whether the parents who feel that way should be able to dictate what all the other parents' children get to learn.

And that's where the problem lies, beyond the source of the efforts to get people worked up.

This is the issue. I see we cannot, as a nation agree (if we ever could) what the commonality of education envisioned by Horace Mann should be. As the Overton Window moves more rapidly, there are more parties discomfited by the direction of discourse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

[Typical Lax Dad]

Is this the country we want to live in??

Red states threaten librarians with prison — as blue states work to protect them

Sam Lee, a leader of the Connecticut Library Association, heads to work these days torn between hope and fear.

She’s encouraged because legislators in her state proposed a bill this year making it harder for school boards to ban library books. But she’s fearful because Connecticut, like America, is seeing a sustained surge in book challenges — and she wonders if objectors will see the legislation as a reason to file more complaints.

“I would like to be optimistic,” Lee said. “But having been in my position for the last few years … I don’t know, it really feels like it’s been forever. And I am worried the book banners are just going to be emboldened.”

The bill in Connecticut, pending before an education committee, is one of a raft of measures advancing nationwide that seek to do things like prohibit book bans or forbid the harassment of school and public librarians — the first such wave in the country, said John Chrastka, director of library advocacy group EveryLibrary. Legislators in 22 mostly blue states have proposed 57 such bills so far this year, and two have become law, according to a Washington Post analysis of state legislative databases and an EveryLibrary legislative tracker.

But the library-friendly measures are being outpaced by bills in mostly red states that aim to restrict which books libraries can offer and threaten librarians with prison or thousands in fines for handing out “obscene” or “harmful” titles. At least 27 states are considering 100 such bills this year, three of which have become law, The Post found. That adds to nearly a dozen similar measures enacted over the last three years across 10 states.

Lawmakers proposing restrictive bills contend they are necessary because school and public libraries contain graphic sexual material that should not be available to children. Some books’ “sole purpose is sexual gratification,” said West Virginia Del. Brandon Steele (R), who introduced a bill that would allow librarians to be prosecuted for giving obscene titles to minors.

..

I don't have a good answer to your question, but I'm hoping to understand this better to form my answer.

In your view, or anyone else who wants to chime in, could there be a book so obscene or bad in any other way that we would want to 1) ban it from schools or libraries or 2) prosecute a librarian for providing the book to a minor?

Should the number of banned books always be zero?

What do we call it if an adult book (with depictions of sex or violence) is in an elementary school library and people complain about that. Are they in favor of censorship and banning books? Can we compare them to nazis? Is there a different way to describe that?

These are actual questions, not rhetorical ones.

Easy answer: it's 2024, not 1950. Your kids can access EVERYTHING, and i mean EVERYTHING just with their smart phones. Images, videos, hate-mongering....all the best, and very much the worst, that the world has to offer.

The idea here is that we should worry about a kid picking up an actual, physical book in 2024?

Either these parents don't have kids, or they have no clue what "the internet" is. In either case, let the professional librarians that we pay sort it out. And more books are ALWAYS better than less....this America, not Russia or North Korea. Let THOSE chaps ban all the books they want. We're supposed to be better than that.

I made reference to an elementary school. My 9 year old attends an elementary school for 3rd, 4th and 5th graders. He's in 4th grade. I don't know many kids in 4th who have a smart phone. My son's computer access is somewhat limited by the amount of time we allow him to be on a computer and the access his school allows on their devices.

So, in my own life, if my son’s school’s librarian gave my son a book with graphic sexual content I would complain to the principal. Is that unreasonable?

You have every right to complain to the Principal as it may allow them to implement a better system for what is or what isn’t appropriate for particular children if a child requests a book. A legitimate question: Do believe that book should be banned if it’s not “pornography” if you find it inappropriate for your child?

Thank you for the thoughtful discussion. I guess I'm trying to understand what it means for a book to be "banned". If I complain and the book is removed from the elementary library, did I/we just ban a book? Will it show up on "banned book lists" and be used to prove that conservatives are wacky religious nuts?

To answer your question...if I think the book is just an adult book with graphic sex and violence that, imo, isn't appropriate for a 9 year old, I would complain that it is in an elementary school library. I wouldn't want it removed from all libraries everywhere.

I would also wonder why the librarian is, in this scenario, personally suggesting the book to my 9 year old. I realize I'm coming up with an extreme example. I think I'm trying to find some common ground.

I think that’s an entirely reasonable and indeed quite normal response to an explicit graphic sex book in an early elementary school library. Fortunately, I think we probably would find such to be extremely rare, as librarians would be very unlikely to allow or promote such.

If one had that extreme situation, I’d start with a civil discussion with the librarian to find out what logic or information I might be missing. If I found the response to be uncivil or otherwise unsatisfactory I’d meet with the principal to make sure they knew of the situation. I’d have strong confidence that any such extreme situation would be properly addressed, at a minimum keeping such material away from open access with out supervision, including my own preferences for my specific child. If not, I might move my child.

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too. Whether related to gender or sexuality or to history, angry biases of the few are seeking control of everyone.

I don’t think book bans are ever the right answer for any public institutions, all the more so when there are common sense approaches which are far less draconian and far less intrusive to other parents’ preferences.

MD, my apologies for neglecting this discussion. I started up a discussion when I knew I had a lot on my plate personally, and I probably should've just held off until I knew I had more time to devote to this. I appreciate your response.

I believe you when you state

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too.

but I wonder if those parents are being driven to this by more than just following far right personalities online. I have no specific example, but I could see parents taking big actions if they feel that their child's school is trying to instill values that go against the parent's values.

This was a huge ruckus in Newtown. Look at the number of times the school tried to install a value in a child….

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/newyork/new ... l-library/

I don’t believe a handful of parents should dictate what all the other kids in a district can learn.

[ohmilax34]

Is this the country we want to live in??

Red states threaten librarians with prison — as blue states work to protect them

Sam Lee, a leader of the Connecticut Library Association, heads to work these days torn between hope and fear.

She’s encouraged because legislators in her state proposed a bill this year making it harder for school boards to ban library books. But she’s fearful because Connecticut, like America, is seeing a sustained surge in book challenges — and she wonders if objectors will see the legislation as a reason to file more complaints.

“I would like to be optimistic,” Lee said. “But having been in my position for the last few years … I don’t know, it really feels like it’s been forever. And I am worried the book banners are just going to be emboldened.”

The bill in Connecticut, pending before an education committee, is one of a raft of measures advancing nationwide that seek to do things like prohibit book bans or forbid the harassment of school and public librarians — the first such wave in the country, said John Chrastka, director of library advocacy group EveryLibrary. Legislators in 22 mostly blue states have proposed 57 such bills so far this year, and two have become law, according to a Washington Post analysis of state legislative databases and an EveryLibrary legislative tracker.

But the library-friendly measures are being outpaced by bills in mostly red states that aim to restrict which books libraries can offer and threaten librarians with prison or thousands in fines for handing out “obscene” or “harmful” titles. At least 27 states are considering 100 such bills this year, three of which have become law, The Post found. That adds to nearly a dozen similar measures enacted over the last three years across 10 states.

Lawmakers proposing restrictive bills contend they are necessary because school and public libraries contain graphic sexual material that should not be available to children. Some books’ “sole purpose is sexual gratification,” said West Virginia Del. Brandon Steele (R), who introduced a bill that would allow librarians to be prosecuted for giving obscene titles to minors.

..

I don't have a good answer to your question, but I'm hoping to understand this better to form my answer.

In your view, or anyone else who wants to chime in, could there be a book so obscene or bad in any other way that we would want to 1) ban it from schools or libraries or 2) prosecute a librarian for providing the book to a minor?

Should the number of banned books always be zero?

What do we call it if an adult book (with depictions of sex or violence) is in an elementary school library and people complain about that. Are they in favor of censorship and banning books? Can we compare them to nazis? Is there a different way to describe that?

These are actual questions, not rhetorical ones.

Easy answer: it's 2024, not 1950. Your kids can access EVERYTHING, and i mean EVERYTHING just with their smart phones. Images, videos, hate-mongering....all the best, and very much the worst, that the world has to offer.

The idea here is that we should worry about a kid picking up an actual, physical book in 2024?

Either these parents don't have kids, or they have no clue what "the internet" is. In either case, let the professional librarians that we pay sort it out. And more books are ALWAYS better than less....this America, not Russia or North Korea. Let THOSE chaps ban all the books they want. We're supposed to be better than that.

I made reference to an elementary school. My 9 year old attends an elementary school for 3rd, 4th and 5th graders. He's in 4th grade. I don't know many kids in 4th who have a smart phone. My son's computer access is somewhat limited by the amount of time we allow him to be on a computer and the access his school allows on their devices.

So, in my own life, if my son’s school’s librarian gave my son a book with graphic sexual content I would complain to the principal. Is that unreasonable?

You have every right to complain to the Principal as it may allow them to implement a better system for what is or what isn’t appropriate for particular children if a child requests a book. A legitimate question: Do believe that book should be banned if it’s not “pornography” if you find it inappropriate for your child?

Thank you for the thoughtful discussion. I guess I'm trying to understand what it means for a book to be "banned". If I complain and the book is removed from the elementary library, did I/we just ban a book? Will it show up on "banned book lists" and be used to prove that conservatives are wacky religious nuts?

To answer your question...if I think the book is just an adult book with graphic sex and violence that, imo, isn't appropriate for a 9 year old, I would complain that it is in an elementary school library. I wouldn't want it removed from all libraries everywhere.

I would also wonder why the librarian is, in this scenario, personally suggesting the book to my 9 year old. I realize I'm coming up with an extreme example. I think I'm trying to find some common ground.

I think that’s an entirely reasonable and indeed quite normal response to an explicit graphic sex book in an early elementary school library. Fortunately, I think we probably would find such to be extremely rare, as librarians would be very unlikely to allow or promote such.

If one had that extreme situation, I’d start with a civil discussion with the librarian to find out what logic or information I might be missing. If I found the response to be uncivil or otherwise unsatisfactory I’d meet with the principal to make sure they knew of the situation. I’d have strong confidence that any such extreme situation would be properly addressed, at a minimum keeping such material away from open access with out supervision, including my own preferences for my specific child. If not, I might move my child.

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too. Whether related to gender or sexuality or to history, angry biases of the few are seeking control of everyone.

I don’t think book bans are ever the right answer for any public institutions, all the more so when there are common sense approaches which are far less draconian and far less intrusive to other parents’ preferences.

MD, my apologies for neglecting this discussion. I started up a discussion when I knew I had a lot on my plate personally, and I probably should've just held off until I knew I had more time to devote to this. I appreciate your response.

I believe you when you state

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too.

but I wonder if those parents are being driven to this by more than just following far right personalities online. I have no specific example, but I could see parents taking big actions if they feel that their child's school is trying to instill values that go against the parent's values.

This was a huge ruckus in Newtown. Look at the number of times the school tried to install a value in a child….

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/newyork/new ... l-library/

I don’t believe a handful of parents should dictate what all the other kids in a district can learn.

I don’t believe a handful of parents should dictate what all the other kids in a district can learn.

I think most of us are with you on this. Also, I think at least in my state (Ohio) once a book is in a school library, it's very hard to have it removed. That seems like a good thing.

Did these parents often show up to board meetings complaining about a bunch of books or things that were being taught or was it these very few specific books? Were these parents constantly trying to tell the board what the teachers should and shouldn't be teaching? Or, were they totally quiet until they heard about these two specific books being in the library?

[a fan]

Is this the country we want to live in??

Red states threaten librarians with prison — as blue states work to protect them

Sam Lee, a leader of the Connecticut Library Association, heads to work these days torn between hope and fear.

She’s encouraged because legislators in her state proposed a bill this year making it harder for school boards to ban library books. But she’s fearful because Connecticut, like America, is seeing a sustained surge in book challenges — and she wonders if objectors will see the legislation as a reason to file more complaints.

“I would like to be optimistic,” Lee said. “But having been in my position for the last few years … I don’t know, it really feels like it’s been forever. And I am worried the book banners are just going to be emboldened.”

The bill in Connecticut, pending before an education committee, is one of a raft of measures advancing nationwide that seek to do things like prohibit book bans or forbid the harassment of school and public librarians — the first such wave in the country, said John Chrastka, director of library advocacy group EveryLibrary. Legislators in 22 mostly blue states have proposed 57 such bills so far this year, and two have become law, according to a Washington Post analysis of state legislative databases and an EveryLibrary legislative tracker.

But the library-friendly measures are being outpaced by bills in mostly red states that aim to restrict which books libraries can offer and threaten librarians with prison or thousands in fines for handing out “obscene” or “harmful” titles. At least 27 states are considering 100 such bills this year, three of which have become law, The Post found. That adds to nearly a dozen similar measures enacted over the last three years across 10 states.

Lawmakers proposing restrictive bills contend they are necessary because school and public libraries contain graphic sexual material that should not be available to children. Some books’ “sole purpose is sexual gratification,” said West Virginia Del. Brandon Steele (R), who introduced a bill that would allow librarians to be prosecuted for giving obscene titles to minors.

..

I don't have a good answer to your question, but I'm hoping to understand this better to form my answer.

In your view, or anyone else who wants to chime in, could there be a book so obscene or bad in any other way that we would want to 1) ban it from schools or libraries or 2) prosecute a librarian for providing the book to a minor?

Should the number of banned books always be zero?

What do we call it if an adult book (with depictions of sex or violence) is in an elementary school library and people complain about that. Are they in favor of censorship and banning books? Can we compare them to nazis? Is there a different way to describe that?

These are actual questions, not rhetorical ones.

Easy answer: it's 2024, not 1950. Your kids can access EVERYTHING, and i mean EVERYTHING just with their smart phones. Images, videos, hate-mongering....all the best, and very much the worst, that the world has to offer.

The idea here is that we should worry about a kid picking up an actual, physical book in 2024?

Either these parents don't have kids, or they have no clue what "the internet" is. In either case, let the professional librarians that we pay sort it out. And more books are ALWAYS better than less....this America, not Russia or North Korea. Let THOSE chaps ban all the books they want. We're supposed to be better than that.

I made reference to an elementary school. My 9 year old attends an elementary school for 3rd, 4th and 5th graders. He's in 4th grade. I don't know many kids in 4th who have a smart phone. My son's computer access is somewhat limited by the amount of time we allow him to be on a computer and the access his school allows on their devices.

So, in my own life, if my son’s school’s librarian gave my son a book with graphic sexual content I would complain to the principal. Is that unreasonable?

You have every right to complain to the Principal as it may allow them to implement a better system for what is or what isn’t appropriate for particular children if a child requests a book. A legitimate question: Do believe that book should be banned if it’s not “pornography” if you find it inappropriate for your child?

Thank you for the thoughtful discussion. I guess I'm trying to understand what it means for a book to be "banned". If I complain and the book is removed from the elementary library, did I/we just ban a book? Will it show up on "banned book lists" and be used to prove that conservatives are wacky religious nuts?

To answer your question...if I think the book is just an adult book with graphic sex and violence that, imo, isn't appropriate for a 9 year old, I would complain that it is in an elementary school library. I wouldn't want it removed from all libraries everywhere.

I would also wonder why the librarian is, in this scenario, personally suggesting the book to my 9 year old. I realize I'm coming up with an extreme example. I think I'm trying to find some common ground.

I think that’s an entirely reasonable and indeed quite normal response to an explicit graphic sex book in an early elementary school library. Fortunately, I think we probably would find such to be extremely rare, as librarians would be very unlikely to allow or promote such.

If one had that extreme situation, I’d start with a civil discussion with the librarian to find out what logic or information I might be missing. If I found the response to be uncivil or otherwise unsatisfactory I’d meet with the principal to make sure they knew of the situation. I’d have strong confidence that any such extreme situation would be properly addressed, at a minimum keeping such material away from open access with out supervision, including my own preferences for my specific child. If not, I might move my child.

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too. Whether related to gender or sexuality or to history, angry biases of the few are seeking control of everyone.

I don’t think book bans are ever the right answer for any public institutions, all the more so when there are common sense approaches which are far less draconian and far less intrusive to other parents’ preferences.

MD, my apologies for neglecting this discussion. I started up a discussion when I knew I had a lot on my plate personally, and I probably should've just held off until I knew I had more time to devote to this. I appreciate your response.

I believe you when you state

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too.

but I wonder if those parents are being driven to this by more than just following far right personalities online. I have no specific example, but I could see parents taking big actions if they feel that their child's school is trying to instill values that go against the parent's values.

This was a huge ruckus in Newtown. Look at the number of times the school tried to install a value in a child….

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/newyork/new ... l-library/

I don’t believe a handful of parents should dictate what all the other kids in a district can learn.

I don’t believe a handful of parents should dictate what all the other kids in a district can learn.

I think most of us are with you on this

Most of us are indeed in agreement, ohmilax. I personally have no interest in injecting my personal views on what books are in a public school library, and taking that choice away from another kid's family. And I have faith in my own kid to figure out what she wants to read, and would never step in to keep her from reading whatever the heck she wants to read....telling her that curiosity is a bad thing.

[cradleandshoot]

Is this the country we want to live in??

Red states threaten librarians with prison — as blue states work to protect them

Sam Lee, a leader of the Connecticut Library Association, heads to work these days torn between hope and fear.

She’s encouraged because legislators in her state proposed a bill this year making it harder for school boards to ban library books. But she’s fearful because Connecticut, like America, is seeing a sustained surge in book challenges — and she wonders if objectors will see the legislation as a reason to file more complaints.

“I would like to be optimistic,” Lee said. “But having been in my position for the last few years … I don’t know, it really feels like it’s been forever. And I am worried the book banners are just going to be emboldened.”

The bill in Connecticut, pending before an education committee, is one of a raft of measures advancing nationwide that seek to do things like prohibit book bans or forbid the harassment of school and public librarians — the first such wave in the country, said John Chrastka, director of library advocacy group EveryLibrary. Legislators in 22 mostly blue states have proposed 57 such bills so far this year, and two have become law, according to a Washington Post analysis of state legislative databases and an EveryLibrary legislative tracker.

But the library-friendly measures are being outpaced by bills in mostly red states that aim to restrict which books libraries can offer and threaten librarians with prison or thousands in fines for handing out “obscene” or “harmful” titles. At least 27 states are considering 100 such bills this year, three of which have become law, The Post found. That adds to nearly a dozen similar measures enacted over the last three years across 10 states.

Lawmakers proposing restrictive bills contend they are necessary because school and public libraries contain graphic sexual material that should not be available to children. Some books’ “sole purpose is sexual gratification,” said West Virginia Del. Brandon Steele (R), who introduced a bill that would allow librarians to be prosecuted for giving obscene titles to minors.

..

I don't have a good answer to your question, but I'm hoping to understand this better to form my answer.

In your view, or anyone else who wants to chime in, could there be a book so obscene or bad in any other way that we would want to 1) ban it from schools or libraries or 2) prosecute a librarian for providing the book to a minor?

Should the number of banned books always be zero?

What do we call it if an adult book (with depictions of sex or violence) is in an elementary school library and people complain about that. Are they in favor of censorship and banning books? Can we compare them to nazis? Is there a different way to describe that?

These are actual questions, not rhetorical ones.

Easy answer: it's 2024, not 1950. Your kids can access EVERYTHING, and i mean EVERYTHING just with their smart phones. Images, videos, hate-mongering....all the best, and very much the worst, that the world has to offer.

The idea here is that we should worry about a kid picking up an actual, physical book in 2024?

Either these parents don't have kids, or they have no clue what "the internet" is. In either case, let the professional librarians that we pay sort it out. And more books are ALWAYS better than less....this America, not Russia or North Korea. Let THOSE chaps ban all the books they want. We're supposed to be better than that.

I made reference to an elementary school. My 9 year old attends an elementary school for 3rd, 4th and 5th graders. He's in 4th grade. I don't know many kids in 4th who have a smart phone. My son's computer access is somewhat limited by the amount of time we allow him to be on a computer and the access his school allows on their devices.

So, in my own life, if my son’s school’s librarian gave my son a book with graphic sexual content I would complain to the principal. Is that unreasonable?

You have every right to complain to the Principal as it may allow them to implement a better system for what is or what isn’t appropriate for particular children if a child requests a book. A legitimate question: Do believe that book should be banned if it’s not “pornography” if you find it inappropriate for your child?

Thank you for the thoughtful discussion. I guess I'm trying to understand what it means for a book to be "banned". If I complain and the book is removed from the elementary library, did I/we just ban a book? Will it show up on "banned book lists" and be used to prove that conservatives are wacky religious nuts?

To answer your question...if I think the book is just an adult book with graphic sex and violence that, imo, isn't appropriate for a 9 year old, I would complain that it is in an elementary school library. I wouldn't want it removed from all libraries everywhere.

I would also wonder why the librarian is, in this scenario, personally suggesting the book to my 9 year old. I realize I'm coming up with an extreme example. I think I'm trying to find some common ground.

I think that’s an entirely reasonable and indeed quite normal response to an explicit graphic sex book in an early elementary school library. Fortunately, I think we probably would find such to be extremely rare, as librarians would be very unlikely to allow or promote such.

If one had that extreme situation, I’d start with a civil discussion with the librarian to find out what logic or information I might be missing. If I found the response to be uncivil or otherwise unsatisfactory I’d meet with the principal to make sure they knew of the situation. I’d have strong confidence that any such extreme situation would be properly addressed, at a minimum keeping such material away from open access with out supervision, including my own preferences for my specific child. If not, I might move my child.

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too. Whether related to gender or sexuality or to history, angry biases of the few are seeking control of everyone.

I don’t think book bans are ever the right answer for any public institutions, all the more so when there are common sense approaches which are far less draconian and far less intrusive to other parents’ preferences.

MD, my apologies for neglecting this discussion. I started up a discussion when I knew I had a lot on my plate personally, and I probably should've just held off until I knew I had more time to devote to this. I appreciate your response.

I believe you when you state

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too.

but I wonder if those parents are being driven to this by more than just following far right personalities online. I have no specific example, but I could see parents taking big actions if they feel that their child's school is trying to instill values that go against the parent's values.

This was a huge ruckus in Newtown. Look at the number of times the school tried to install a value in a child….

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/newyork/new ... l-library/

I don’t believe a handful of parents should dictate what all the other kids in a district can learn.

I don’t believe a handful of parents should dictate what all the other kids in a district can learn.

I think most of us are with you on this

Most of us are indeed in agreement, ohmilax. I personally have no interest in injecting my personal views on what books are in a public school library, and taking that choice away from another kid's family. And I have faith in my own kid to figure out what she wants to read, and would never step in to keep her from reading whatever the heck she wants to read....telling her that curiosity is a bad thing.

+1 I remember back around 2005 when my kids were in school that The Adventures of Tom Sawyer were banned because Samuel Langhorne Clemmons composed his classic novel in the vernacular of his era. I think some people are more afraid of the N word than they are of heights. It was a classic book written as only Mr Clemmons could do. FTR I don't get it. Anybody who ever read Fahrenheit 451 understands that burning books doesn't change people's hearts and minds.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Is this the country we want to live in??

Red states threaten librarians with prison — as blue states work to protect them

Sam Lee, a leader of the Connecticut Library Association, heads to work these days torn between hope and fear.

She’s encouraged because legislators in her state proposed a bill this year making it harder for school boards to ban library books. But she’s fearful because Connecticut, like America, is seeing a sustained surge in book challenges — and she wonders if objectors will see the legislation as a reason to file more complaints.

“I would like to be optimistic,” Lee said. “But having been in my position for the last few years … I don’t know, it really feels like it’s been forever. And I am worried the book banners are just going to be emboldened.”

The bill in Connecticut, pending before an education committee, is one of a raft of measures advancing nationwide that seek to do things like prohibit book bans or forbid the harassment of school and public librarians — the first such wave in the country, said John Chrastka, director of library advocacy group EveryLibrary. Legislators in 22 mostly blue states have proposed 57 such bills so far this year, and two have become law, according to a Washington Post analysis of state legislative databases and an EveryLibrary legislative tracker.

But the library-friendly measures are being outpaced by bills in mostly red states that aim to restrict which books libraries can offer and threaten librarians with prison or thousands in fines for handing out “obscene” or “harmful” titles. At least 27 states are considering 100 such bills this year, three of which have become law, The Post found. That adds to nearly a dozen similar measures enacted over the last three years across 10 states.

Lawmakers proposing restrictive bills contend they are necessary because school and public libraries contain graphic sexual material that should not be available to children. Some books’ “sole purpose is sexual gratification,” said West Virginia Del. Brandon Steele (R), who introduced a bill that would allow librarians to be prosecuted for giving obscene titles to minors.

..

I don't have a good answer to your question, but I'm hoping to understand this better to form my answer.

In your view, or anyone else who wants to chime in, could there be a book so obscene or bad in any other way that we would want to 1) ban it from schools or libraries or 2) prosecute a librarian for providing the book to a minor?

Should the number of banned books always be zero?

What do we call it if an adult book (with depictions of sex or violence) is in an elementary school library and people complain about that. Are they in favor of censorship and banning books? Can we compare them to nazis? Is there a different way to describe that?

These are actual questions, not rhetorical ones.

Easy answer: it's 2024, not 1950. Your kids can access EVERYTHING, and i mean EVERYTHING just with their smart phones. Images, videos, hate-mongering....all the best, and very much the worst, that the world has to offer.

The idea here is that we should worry about a kid picking up an actual, physical book in 2024?

Either these parents don't have kids, or they have no clue what "the internet" is. In either case, let the professional librarians that we pay sort it out. And more books are ALWAYS better than less....this America, not Russia or North Korea. Let THOSE chaps ban all the books they want. We're supposed to be better than that.

I made reference to an elementary school. My 9 year old attends an elementary school for 3rd, 4th and 5th graders. He's in 4th grade. I don't know many kids in 4th who have a smart phone. My son's computer access is somewhat limited by the amount of time we allow him to be on a computer and the access his school allows on their devices.

So, in my own life, if my son’s school’s librarian gave my son a book with graphic sexual content I would complain to the principal. Is that unreasonable?

You have every right to complain to the Principal as it may allow them to implement a better system for what is or what isn’t appropriate for particular children if a child requests a book. A legitimate question: Do believe that book should be banned if it’s not “pornography” if you find it inappropriate for your child?

Thank you for the thoughtful discussion. I guess I'm trying to understand what it means for a book to be "banned". If I complain and the book is removed from the elementary library, did I/we just ban a book? Will it show up on "banned book lists" and be used to prove that conservatives are wacky religious nuts?

To answer your question...if I think the book is just an adult book with graphic sex and violence that, imo, isn't appropriate for a 9 year old, I would complain that it is in an elementary school library. I wouldn't want it removed from all libraries everywhere.

I would also wonder why the librarian is, in this scenario, personally suggesting the book to my 9 year old. I realize I'm coming up with an extreme example. I think I'm trying to find some common ground.

I think that’s an entirely reasonable and indeed quite normal response to an explicit graphic sex book in an early elementary school library. Fortunately, I think we probably would find such to be extremely rare, as librarians would be very unlikely to allow or promote such.

If one had that extreme situation, I’d start with a civil discussion with the librarian to find out what logic or information I might be missing. If I found the response to be uncivil or otherwise unsatisfactory I’d meet with the principal to make sure they knew of the situation. I’d have strong confidence that any such extreme situation would be properly addressed, at a minimum keeping such material away from open access with out supervision, including my own preferences for my specific child. If not, I might move my child.

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too. Whether related to gender or sexuality or to history, angry biases of the few are seeking control of everyone.

I don’t think book bans are ever the right answer for any public institutions, all the more so when there are common sense approaches which are far less draconian and far less intrusive to other parents’ preferences.

MD, my apologies for neglecting this discussion. I started up a discussion when I knew I had a lot on my plate personally, and I probably should've just held off until I knew I had more time to devote to this. I appreciate your response.

I believe you when you state

However, what is getting challenged, at all age levels, are books and information that are simply not in some peoples’ view within their preferred proscription for ‘normal’ or ‘inoffensive’. They wish to control not only what their children read or learn, they demand control of other parents’ children’s access and learning too.

but I wonder if those parents are being driven to this by more than just following far right personalities online. I have no specific example, but I could see parents taking big actions if they feel that their child's school is trying to instill values that go against the parent's values.

This was a huge ruckus in Newtown. Look at the number of times the school tried to install a value in a child….

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/newyork/new ... l-library/

I don’t believe a handful of parents should dictate what all the other kids in a district can learn.

I don’t believe a handful of parents should dictate what all the other kids in a district can learn.

I think most of us are with you on this. Also, I think at least in my state (Ohio) once a book is in a school library, it's very hard to have it removed. That seems like a good thing.

Did these parents often show up to board meetings complaining about a bunch of books or things that were being taught or was it these very few specific books? Were these parents constantly trying to tell the board what the teachers should and shouldn't be teaching? Or, were they totally quiet until they heard about these two specific books being in the library?

A parent found a book that was in the Library and sent out a town wide email / next door message to alert other parents that pornographic material was being given to kids…..I heard about it daily from a colleague who’s wife was all up in arms although none of their kids had seen it…..I told him this “are you the guy that complains about finding drug paraphernalia in your kids room and worried about how much pot he smokes? And you and your wife are upset about a book in the library?”…..I told him “you have no idea what your kids do and they live under your roof….. a book in the library should be the least of your concerns”…..he had a dumb look on his face. His daughter is a cheerleader and his wife manages the cheerleading team for competitions…..no group of high school girls are more sexualized than cheerleaders…..It’s all ridiculous.