Utah Bans 13 books from state schools

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by Karellen

You would give your argument a lot more credence if you actually read the book, instead of blindly arguing against it. Statements/sentences/words taken out of context can always be twisted into something horrifying to support your argument.

I read enough of the book to know that I don't want to read any more of it. It doesn't take the brain of Einstein to realize that sexually explicit scenes are sexually explicit. How many of these scenes do I have to read to come to the conclusion that this is not suitable for children. All of them? Good grief.

Originally Posted by Karellen

What is your hang up with the natural human state? You have children, so you have obviously engaged in the "smut" behaviour... so why do you trash it? Are you one of those people that thinks it is ok when you do it, but disgusting when anybody else does it?

I am married, I've only been "smutty" with one woman in my life. What do you have against moral behavior or my attempt to keep my children (and children in general) away from being brainwashed into thinking that moral behavior is somehow "unnatural." Do you think unwed teenage mothers or rampant abortion should be the norm? Do you think children do better in a single parent home? Do you think sexually transmitted diseases are a good thing? Do you think smutty books discourage or encourage underage sex?

It appears your "norm" and my "norm" are at opposite poles.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by rcentros

But what about parents who do watch over their kids and successfully keep their children from running around having sex, drinking and taking drugs? Should they be undermined by a school librarian who thinks smut for kids is a-okay?

When my daughter was fourteen, she had fraught memories of a church group weekend camp where the girls involved (ages 13 to 16) spent most of an evening discussing whether oral and anal intercourse really qualified as sex. This went far beyond what my daughter had learned in the official school curriculum. My wife and I were rather surprised when after she came home, she asked us questions about the discussion and not very happy trying to answer her questions.

These were a group of "good kids", a majority of whom were home schooled and most of whom had very strict home environments. When I showed up for an appointment I made to discuss this with the children's pastor, they basically did not want to discuss the topic since they were "good kids" and "my daughter probably misunderstood the discussion".

My daughter ended up breaking up with the friend who had convinced her it would be fun to attend the weekend camp. Evidently the hard sell on being saved was about as attractive as the evening sex talk.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I think the discussion is going in circles now. If you think you have something insightful to say on this topic, say it now, because I'll be closing this thread in about 10 hours time.

Agreed. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to change anyone else's mind and I know without a doubt that they're not going to change mine.

So, to keep myself from being tempted to post anymore in this thread, I'm going to block myself from it.

[Aleron Ives]

Originally Posted by John F

Are you referring to a Utah law?

Originally Posted by DNSB

I think they are suggesting that some books will require a parental permission slip to be on record before the student is allowed to check out certain books.

I was referring to parents being parents and supervising how their minor children spend their time, including finding out which books they've checked out from the library. As a parent, you could forbid your children from checking out certain books or even require them to return books that you don't want them to read, but your parental rights don't give you the ability to forbid other people's children from checking out and reading those books (by denying the library's ability to offer them).

As a parent, you have the right to control which kinds of entertainment your children can access. In the US at least, you do not have the right to impose that control on other people through the power of the state, as book bans are a violation of everybody else's First Amendment rights.

[Aleron Ives]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Do you think unwed teenage mothers or rampant abortion should be the norm? [...] Do you think sexually transmitted diseases are a good thing?

If I'm not mistaken, rates of teenage sex and pregnancy have been declining for quite some time, so one could argue that increased access to "smut" has led to a decrease in the negative outcomes you've mentioned.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by rcentros

"Thankfully?" Because kids really, really need smut?

Originally Posted by rcentros

Okay, so tell me how this parent's right to keep their kids away from smut works when the school librarian stocks the school library with smut? What you're really saying is that the school librarian should have a veto over parental rights.

I don't agree with that. Again, this is one reason my kids didn't go to public school. Too many teachers and administrators who think they know better than the parents how kids should be brought up. But not every parent has that choice to keep their child out of public school... unfortunately.

I left this thread because it's being shut down and my answers at this point will be political (post 61).

Adios

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by rcentros

I am married, I've only been "smutty" with one woman in my life. What do you have against moral behavior or my attempt to keep my children (and children in general) away from being brainwashed into thinking that moral behavior is somehow "unnatural." Do you think unwed teenage mothers or rampant abortion should be the norm? Do you think children do better in a single parent home? Do you think sexually transmitted diseases are a good thing? Do you think smutty books discourage or encourage underage sex?

It appears your "norm" and my "norm" are at opposite poles.

My wife and I made sure that our children knew enough that IF they decided to have sex, it would done as safely as possible. We did not hide our heads in the sand and pretend that you can control your children.

From how I read the statistics, unwed teenage mothers occur in all socioeconomic strata though the upper strata can better afford to hide or terminate the pregnancies. And yes, I find the rhetoric about abortion to be rather risible considering the number of people who are anti-abortion even when the pregnancy is the result of rape, incest, endangers the mother's life, etc. The arguments against the morning after pill are even sillier since that leads to the argument that women should be pregnant as often as possible since each ovum that is not fertilized and is lost to a period is a zero-day abortion.

Oddly a quick look at the statistics suggests that teenage pregnancies are on a decline though teenage sex still seems to be rather popular. Perhaps those smutty books are teaching the kids about using protection?

And really, your comment about single parents is a bit risible. Most of the single parents I know do their best to ensure that their children did not suffer from the lack of two parents in the same house. For the most part, I considered many of those children to be better off with one loving parent rather than two parents, one of whom was stuck in the 1800s.

As for STDs, again education does better than ignorance in preventing the spread of STDs. As one friend of my wife said when her husband gave her chlamydia which she did not find out about until a test after she became pregnant, she received an real education in STDs over the next couple of weeks.

As for "moral" behaviour? Do feel that beating your wife and children as long as you use a stick no thicker than your thumb is moral? Do you feel that keeping slaves regardless of race is moral? Do you feel that having multiple wives and concubines is moral? Do you agree that a husband and wife are one person and that person is the husband? After all, those have all been accepted behaviour at some point or another in history and some in the current time.

As for smutty books encouraging underage sex? There seems to have quite a bit of underage sex before literacy became common so I doubt there is much of a correlation between smutty books and underage sex.

[John F]

Originally Posted by Aleron Ives

...

As a parent, you have the right to control which kinds of entertainment your children can access. In the US at least, you do not have the right to impose that control on other people through the power of the state, as book bans are a violation of everybody else's First Amendment rights.

As I think this may be political, so I'll follow up on this in the other thread tomorrow.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by mrscoach

School libraries have limited funds, so I think those funds need to be funneled to less controversial books for the most part. I'm torn on a statewide ban on books, I'm for a more locally controlled collection.

I didn't buy the whole 'they grow up and need exposure or they'll get it on their own' because I've heard the same argument for both alcohol and drugs.

The phase was "Removed from...". To me, that means the money is now wasted as the book WERE already there

[PeterT]

Can I offer a sincere apology for starting these threads IIN the first place. I never expected then to take this path.

In many ways I am flabbergasted to see the views being expressed, and to see the restrictions being placed by the few on the many.

Over and out

Sent from my Pixel 7a using Tapatalk

[DiapDealer]

The thread has definitely run its course, but I thought everyone did a pretty decent job of staying within the rules, myself. There's been more heated Kindle vs Kobo threads, IMO. **shrug**

[cgsmom]

It is difficult to discuss this subject without getting into politics. I live in Utah and I can assure you that the entire subject is motivated by politics. The people who are pushing this ban and not interested in protecting children. They are only interested in exerting control over others.

A lawsuit was filed to remove a book from school libraries because there was a story in it about two daughters who got their father drunk and had sex with him. Of course, that book was the Bible but the court upheld the ban based on the law. Then a lot of people were saying “but that’s not what we wanted”.

So it is a political mess like everything else in the US now.

[DNSB]

I think I'm joining the exodus from this thread.

But he offered them to a mob first.

I suspect that Lot was not going to win father of the year.

[Aleron Ives]

Originally Posted by John F

I'll follow up on this in the other thread tomorrow.

That's fine by me, but I don't know that there's much more to be said at this point.

[haertig]

Wow, reading this thread - it sure looks like my wife and I missed out on a lot of drama by sending our kids to a private school. We never encountered anything like this. The school concentrated on educating the kids, and that's what they did - ignoring the battles and fights between opposing factions in our society. Not picking one side or the other in this incomprehensible fight - but if these kind of battles are what's going on in our public schools, I say get rid of public schools and give us our tax money back.