Seriously with the book banning ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh America! I mean it is Florida, but still.
https://www.rawstory.com/banned-books-in-florida/

member of the Flagler County, Florida school board has filed a criminal complaint over four copies of an LGBTQ book recommended for 14 to 18 year olds, claiming it violates the state's obscenity laws.

"My concern is for the children of Flagler County," Jill Woolbright claims, according to the Palm Coast Observer. "This book needs to be investigated as a crime in our media center. This is pretty heavy stuff, violating our own policies.

Book banning. I don’t think you really understand the meaning of the phrase. It is impossible for a school to ban a book. Sure, it can exclude a book from its library and not make it a part of the curriculum on the grounds that a significant portion of parents believe that reading “great literature” containing descriptions of fisting and the like is not necessary to become educated. But these books are still available in the marketplace. In fact, parents are free to expose their own children to pornographic material to whatever extent they choose. But schools should not make the consumption of these materials compulsory and are not obligated to make them freely available. This is really not a complicated issue.

They know all of this. There are certain people who have kept this thread alive for years because they are so desperate for the state to provide sexual material to other people’s children. Of course they likely don’t even have children.

No, it is about free speech and exchange of ideas. Things the right was supposed to be so adamant about when wanting a nativity scene on public space.

No. It’s about sexual content. Why not put hustler in the school library if you are a free speech absolutist?

And please spare us the nonsense that book banning is only coming from one side.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/11/03/to-kill-a-mockingbird-book-ban-removal-washington/

And you support banning the Bible in school libraries, correct? If not you are a hypocrite.

Of course. As an atheist I believe that no religion should be promoted to children in public schools.

I notice that you didn’t respond to my question. Why not provide hustler to your kids in school, you support that right? Or perhaps you’re the hypocrite.

Anyone who compares Hustler to the books that Moms for “Liberty” are trying to remove from school libraries and classrooms is not arguing in good faith. And clearly also not a lover of books

Anyone who actually considers "Gender Queer" et al to be on a booklover's list is not arguing in good faith. I mean, seriously? Do you even hear yourself?
DP

What is wrong with that?

Bless your heart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awfully quiet in here.

Is it?

Sounds like teachers don’t think that book is a useful resource in the classroom anymore. That’s not banning.

The struggle for fascists to feel like not fascists is real, I’m sure, but I also think you guys are currently beyond redemption.

OMG. I can't even with your moving the goalposts every time Democrats are caught being hypocrites - which is every single day. You people are such a joke.
DP

Okay?

“Banning” is a real word with a specific meaning. What these teachers did isn’t “banning.” What the Orwellian named “Moms for Liberty” is doing is banning. Several elected Republicans have been giddy about banning and burning books.

Your party is fascist.

So - just to be clear - you consider keeping school libraries full of AGE-APPROPRIATE books to be "banning," even though the books in question are widely available at any bookstore, public library, Amazon, etc. But somehow, teachers saying "To Kill a Mockingbird" is inappropriate and will not be part of the required curriculum, is NOT banning.

Also, exactly which elected Republican is "giddy about banning and burning books"? We'll wait while you dredge up some BS from a LWNJ propaganda site.

Will students be able to check out To Kill a Mockingbird from the school library if they want to, even if teachers don't put it in the curriculum? Yes or no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awfully quiet in here.

Is it?

Sounds like teachers don’t think that book is a useful resource in the classroom anymore. That’s not banning.

The struggle for fascists to feel like not fascists is real, I’m sure, but I also think you guys are currently beyond redemption.

OMG. I can't even with your moving the goalposts every time Democrats are caught being hypocrites - which is every single day. You people are such a joke.
DP

Okay?

“Banning” is a real word with a specific meaning. What these teachers did isn’t “banning.” What the Orwellian named “Moms for Liberty” is doing is banning. Several elected Republicans have been giddy about banning and burning books.

Your party is fascist.

So - just to be clear - you consider keeping school libraries full of AGE-APPROPRIATE books to be "banning," even though the books in question are widely available at any bookstore, public library, Amazon, etc. But somehow, teachers saying "To Kill a Mockingbird" is inappropriate and will not be part of the required curriculum, is NOT banning.

Also, exactly which elected Republican is "giddy about banning and burning books"? We'll wait while you dredge up some BS from a LWNJ propaganda site.

Will students be able to check out To Kill a Mockingbird from the school library if they want to, even if teachers don't put it in the curriculum? Yes or no?

I don't know the answer to that question, but bravo on deflecting from the question YOU were asked first. Still waiting on an answer and specific examples.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awfully quiet in here.

Is it?

Sounds like teachers don’t think that book is a useful resource in the classroom anymore. That’s not banning.

The struggle for fascists to feel like not fascists is real, I’m sure, but I also think you guys are currently beyond redemption.

OMG. I can't even with your moving the goalposts every time Democrats are caught being hypocrites - which is every single day. You people are such a joke.
DP

Okay?

“Banning” is a real word with a specific meaning. What these teachers did isn’t “banning.” What the Orwellian named “Moms for Liberty” is doing is banning. Several elected Republicans have been giddy about banning and burning books.

Your party is fascist.

So - just to be clear - you consider keeping school libraries full of AGE-APPROPRIATE books to be "banning," even though the books in question are widely available at any bookstore, public library, Amazon, etc. But somehow, teachers saying "To Kill a Mockingbird" is inappropriate and will not be part of the required curriculum, is NOT banning.

Also, exactly which elected Republican is "giddy about banning and burning books"? We'll wait while you dredge up some BS from a LWNJ propaganda site.

Will students be able to check out To Kill a Mockingbird from the school library if they want to, even if teachers don't put it in the curriculum? Yes or no?

Will students be able to read gender queer at the local public library or Barnes and noble even if it’s not at school? Yes or no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh America! I mean it is Florida, but still.
https://www.rawstory.com/banned-books-in-florida/

member of the Flagler County, Florida school board has filed a criminal complaint over four copies of an LGBTQ book recommended for 14 to 18 year olds, claiming it violates the state's obscenity laws.

"My concern is for the children of Flagler County," Jill Woolbright claims, according to the Palm Coast Observer. "This book needs to be investigated as a crime in our media center. This is pretty heavy stuff, violating our own policies.

Book banning. I don’t think you really understand the meaning of the phrase. It is impossible for a school to ban a book. Sure, it can exclude a book from its library and not make it a part of the curriculum on the grounds that a significant portion of parents believe that reading “great literature” containing descriptions of fisting and the like is not necessary to become educated. But these books are still available in the marketplace. In fact, parents are free to expose their own children to pornographic material to whatever extent they choose. But schools should not make the consumption of these materials compulsory and are not obligated to make them freely available. This is really not a complicated issue.

They know all of this. There are certain people who have kept this thread alive for years because they are so desperate for the state to provide sexual material to other people’s children. Of course they likely don’t even have children.

No, it is about free speech and exchange of ideas. Things the right was supposed to be so adamant about when wanting a nativity scene on public space.

No. It’s about sexual content. Why not put hustler in the school library if you are a free speech absolutist?

And please spare us the nonsense that book banning is only coming from one side.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/11/03/to-kill-a-mockingbird-book-ban-removal-washington/

And you support banning the Bible in school libraries, correct? If not you are a hypocrite.

Of course. As an atheist I believe that no religion should be promoted to children in public schools.

I notice that you didn’t respond to my question. Why not provide hustler to your kids in school, you support that right? Or perhaps you’re the hypocrite.

Anyone who compares Hustler to the books that Moms for “Liberty” are trying to remove from school libraries and classrooms is not arguing in good faith. And clearly also not a lover of books

Anyone who actually considers "Gender Queer" et al to be on a booklover's list is not arguing in good faith. I mean, seriously? Do you even hear yourself?
DP

I know some teens who loved Gender Queer. They are book lovers. And that book was important to them.

But go ahead and make your false equation of Hustler with a comic book written for teens going through a tough time with their identity.

BTW, if anyone wants to read an excerpt of Gender Queer, here it is. See for yourself. https://redgoldsparkspress.com/projects/6926504

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of these fascist Proud Moms for anti-Liberty tried to get a school librarian arrested. https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/florida-moms-for-liberty-member-demands-criminal-investigation-over-fantasy-novel-18181127

If people can’t see the Nazi parallels, they’re staying dumb deliberately.

Too funny - you use a far-left source, that itself uses the far-left "gotcha" technique of obtaining the officer's body cam footage. Is that even legal? And if you listen to what she's saying, she specifically says they are not trying to remove any books from the public library (or anywhere else). They simply want sexually graphic books out of the school libraries. Nice try, calling anyone you disagree with "fascists and Nazis."

LEFT BIAS
These media sources are moderate to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Left Bias sources.

Overall, we rate Popular Information Left Biased based on story selection and editorial content that routinely favors liberal causes.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/popular-information/
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/miami-new-times-2/

So you didn’t watch the body cam of the fascist Proud Moms for anti Liberty?

Why do you never answer about all the African American and Jewish and Muslim books you all have banned? Why are you so obsessed with sex and children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just pointing out that despite being deeply dissatisfied with the school board’s COVID chaos, Fairfax County appears to have just voted the same group back into office for another 4 years— 12-0D— in large part because the R candidates ran heavily on book banning and making life difficult for trans kids. And there are plenty of people who would have voted R if Rs had focused on education instead of book banning and LGBTQ kids. Because the incumbents voted back in we’re not beloved. Or even liked. They are just better than 4 years of Mothers of Liberty running school libraries.

This is simply what Democrats do - vote in the same nutters over and over again. If even ONE Republican had been elected to the SB, that would have provided at least a tiny bit of balance. But no. We are destined to relive four more painfully unproductive years, putting academics at the very bottom of a laundry list filled with social issues. No one to blame but yourselves.

You guys ran on banning books and hating trans kids. That’s not academics, that’s wing nut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awfully quiet in here.

Is it?

Sounds like teachers don’t think that book is a useful resource in the classroom anymore. That’s not banning.

The struggle for fascists to feel like not fascists is real, I’m sure, but I also think you guys are currently beyond redemption.

OMG. I can't even with your moving the goalposts every time Democrats are caught being hypocrites - which is every single day. You people are such a joke.
DP

Okay?

“Banning” is a real word with a specific meaning. What these teachers did isn’t “banning.” What the Orwellian named “Moms for Liberty” is doing is banning. Several elected Republicans have been giddy about banning and burning books.

Your party is fascist.

So - just to be clear - you consider keeping school libraries full of AGE-APPROPRIATE books to be "banning," even though the books in question are widely available at any bookstore, public library, Amazon, etc. But somehow, teachers saying "To Kill a Mockingbird" is inappropriate and will not be part of the required curriculum, is NOT banning.

Also, exactly which elected Republican is "giddy about banning and burning books"? We'll wait while you dredge up some BS from a LWNJ propaganda site.

Will students be able to check out To Kill a Mockingbird from the school library if they want to, even if teachers don't put it in the curriculum? Yes or no?

Will students be able to read gender queer at the local public library or Barnes and noble even if it’s not at school? Yes or no?

Depends on if they can get themselves to the local public library or if there is a bookstore near where they live and if they have money to buy it.

What a silly question. School libraries are easy for students to get to. I guess that's why people like you want to remove books from them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awfully quiet in here.

Is it?

Sounds like teachers don’t think that book is a useful resource in the classroom anymore. That’s not banning.

The struggle for fascists to feel like not fascists is real, I’m sure, but I also think you guys are currently beyond redemption.

OMG. I can't even with your moving the goalposts every time Democrats are caught being hypocrites - which is every single day. You people are such a joke.
DP

Okay?

“Banning” is a real word with a specific meaning. What these teachers did isn’t “banning.” What the Orwellian named “Moms for Liberty” is doing is banning. Several elected Republicans have been giddy about banning and burning books.

Your party is fascist.

So - just to be clear - you consider keeping school libraries full of AGE-APPROPRIATE books to be "banning," even though the books in question are widely available at any bookstore, public library, Amazon, etc. But somehow, teachers saying "To Kill a Mockingbird" is inappropriate and will not be part of the required curriculum, is NOT banning.

Also, exactly which elected Republican is "giddy about banning and burning books"? We'll wait while you dredge up some BS from a LWNJ propaganda site.

Will students be able to check out To Kill a Mockingbird from the school library if they want to, even if teachers don't put it in the curriculum? Yes or no?

I don't know the answer to that question, but bravo on deflecting from the question YOU were asked first. Still waiting on an answer and specific examples.

And yet you refuse to answer the question of where the sex acts in Maus are. Or how deciding to not demand To Kill a Mockingbird be in a school curriculum is the exact same thing as removing it from a school entirely so any kid who wanted to read it would have to go out of their way to find a copy.

Still waiting on an answer for both those.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh America! I mean it is Florida, but still.
https://www.rawstory.com/banned-books-in-florida/

member of the Flagler County, Florida school board has filed a criminal complaint over four copies of an LGBTQ book recommended for 14 to 18 year olds, claiming it violates the state's obscenity laws.

"My concern is for the children of Flagler County," Jill Woolbright claims, according to the Palm Coast Observer. "This book needs to be investigated as a crime in our media center. This is pretty heavy stuff, violating our own policies.

Book banning. I don’t think you really understand the meaning of the phrase. It is impossible for a school to ban a book. Sure, it can exclude a book from its library and not make it a part of the curriculum on the grounds that a significant portion of parents believe that reading “great literature” containing descriptions of fisting and the like is not necessary to become educated. But these books are still available in the marketplace. In fact, parents are free to expose their own children to pornographic material to whatever extent they choose. But schools should not make the consumption of these materials compulsory and are not obligated to make them freely available. This is really not a complicated issue.

They know all of this. There are certain people who have kept this thread alive for years because they are so desperate for the state to provide sexual material to other people’s children. Of course they likely don’t even have children.

No, it is about free speech and exchange of ideas. Things the right was supposed to be so adamant about when wanting a nativity scene on public space.

No. It’s about sexual content. Why not put hustler in the school library if you are a free speech absolutist?

And please spare us the nonsense that book banning is only coming from one side.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/11/03/to-kill-a-mockingbird-book-ban-removal-washington/

And you support banning the Bible in school libraries, correct? If not you are a hypocrite.

Of course. As an atheist I believe that no religion should be promoted to children in public schools.

I notice that you didn’t respond to my question. Why not provide hustler to your kids in school, you support that right? Or perhaps you’re the hypocrite.

Anyone who compares Hustler to the books that Moms for “Liberty” are trying to remove from school libraries and classrooms is not arguing in good faith. And clearly also not a lover of books

Anyone who actually considers "Gender Queer" et al to be on a booklover's list is not arguing in good faith. I mean, seriously? Do you even hear yourself?
DP

What is wrong with that?

Bless your heart.

Deflecting? Bravo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh America! I mean it is Florida, but still.
https://www.rawstory.com/banned-books-in-florida/

member of the Flagler County, Florida school board has filed a criminal complaint over four copies of an LGBTQ book recommended for 14 to 18 year olds, claiming it violates the state's obscenity laws.

"My concern is for the children of Flagler County," Jill Woolbright claims, according to the Palm Coast Observer. "This book needs to be investigated as a crime in our media center. This is pretty heavy stuff, violating our own policies.

Book banning. I don’t think you really understand the meaning of the phrase. It is impossible for a school to ban a book. Sure, it can exclude a book from its library and not make it a part of the curriculum on the grounds that a significant portion of parents believe that reading “great literature” containing descriptions of fisting and the like is not necessary to become educated. But these books are still available in the marketplace. In fact, parents are free to expose their own children to pornographic material to whatever extent they choose. But schools should not make the consumption of these materials compulsory and are not obligated to make them freely available. This is really not a complicated issue.

They know all of this. There are certain people who have kept this thread alive for years because they are so desperate for the state to provide sexual material to other people’s children. Of course they likely don’t even have children.

No, it is about free speech and exchange of ideas. Things the right was supposed to be so adamant about when wanting a nativity scene on public space.

No. It’s about sexual content. Why not put hustler in the school library if you are a free speech absolutist?

And please spare us the nonsense that book banning is only coming from one side.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/11/03/to-kill-a-mockingbird-book-ban-removal-washington/

And you support banning the Bible in school libraries, correct? If not you are a hypocrite.

Of course. As an atheist I believe that no religion should be promoted to children in public schools.

I notice that you didn’t respond to my question. Why not provide hustler to your kids in school, you support that right? Or perhaps you’re the hypocrite.

Anyone who compares Hustler to the books that Moms for “Liberty” are trying to remove from school libraries and classrooms is not arguing in good faith. And clearly also not a lover of books

Anyone who actually considers "Gender Queer" et al to be on a booklover's list is not arguing in good faith. I mean, seriously? Do you even hear yourself?
DP

I know some teens who loved Gender Queer. They are book lovers. And that book was important to them.

But go ahead and make your false equation of Hustler with a comic book written for teens going through a tough time with their identity.

BTW, if anyone wants to read an excerpt of Gender Queer, here it is. See for yourself. https://redgoldsparkspress.com/projects/6926504

Just wanted to point out that there are several people posting here and you seem to be accusing ALL of them of being the person who brought up Hustler. I even used "DP" earlier to distinguish myself from that poster.

Thanks for the link - I've already read the entire absurd and sexually graphic thing for myself. No desire to relive that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awfully quiet in here.

Is it?

Sounds like teachers don’t think that book is a useful resource in the classroom anymore. That’s not banning.

The struggle for fascists to feel like not fascists is real, I’m sure, but I also think you guys are currently beyond redemption.

OMG. I can't even with your moving the goalposts every time Democrats are caught being hypocrites - which is every single day. You people are such a joke.
DP

Okay?

“Banning” is a real word with a specific meaning. What these teachers did isn’t “banning.” What the Orwellian named “Moms for Liberty” is doing is banning. Several elected Republicans have been giddy about banning and burning books.

Your party is fascist.

So - just to be clear - you consider keeping school libraries full of AGE-APPROPRIATE books to be "banning," even though the books in question are widely available at any bookstore, public library, Amazon, etc. But somehow, teachers saying "To Kill a Mockingbird" is inappropriate and will not be part of the required curriculum, is NOT banning.

Also, exactly which elected Republican is "giddy about banning and [b]burning books"? We'll wait while you dredge up some BS from a LWNJ propaganda site.[/b]

Will students be able to check out To Kill a Mockingbird from the school library if they want to, even if teachers don't put it in the curriculum? Yes or no?

I don't know the answer to that question, but bravo on deflecting from the question YOU were asked first. Still waiting on an answer and specific examples.

And yet you refuse to answer the question of where the sex acts in Maus are. Or how deciding to not demand To Kill a Mockingbird be in a school curriculum is the exact same thing as removing it from a school entirely so any kid who wanted to read it would have to go out of their way to find a copy.

Still waiting on an answer for both those.

JFC. YOU ARE TALKING TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. I never said anything about Hustler or Maus. And it's clear that you aren't able to answer the question asked of you, bolded for your convenience. Noted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awfully quiet in here.

Is it?

Sounds like teachers don’t think that book is a useful resource in the classroom anymore. That’s not banning.

The struggle for fascists to feel like not fascists is real, I’m sure, but I also think you guys are currently beyond redemption.

OMG. I can't even with your moving the goalposts every time Democrats are caught being hypocrites - which is every single day. You people are such a joke.
DP

Okay?

“Banning” is a real word with a specific meaning. What these teachers did isn’t “banning.” What the Orwellian named “Moms for Liberty” is doing is banning. Several elected Republicans have been giddy about banning and burning books.

Your party is fascist.

So - just to be clear - you consider keeping school libraries full of AGE-APPROPRIATE books to be "banning," even though the books in question are widely available at any bookstore, public library, Amazon, etc. But somehow, teachers saying "To Kill a Mockingbird" is inappropriate and will not be part of the required curriculum, is NOT banning.

Also, exactly which elected Republican is "giddy about banning and burning books"? We'll wait while you dredge up some BS from a LWNJ propaganda site.

There’s too much stupid here.

Republicans have stripped the age appropriate books out of schools altogether, including school libraries. Republicans are trying to strip public libraries of funding, another way to de facto ban books.

Specific teachers in specific classes in one school listened to their students’ reservations about one book. No, that’s not banning. That’s removing that book from the curriculum.

Maybe if your parents had instilled a sense of courage and a love of reading you’d understand what you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just pointing out that despite being deeply dissatisfied with the school board’s COVID chaos, Fairfax County appears to have just voted the same group back into office for another 4 years— 12-0D— in large part because the R candidates ran heavily on book banning and making life difficult for trans kids. And there are plenty of people who would have voted R if Rs had focused on education instead of book banning and LGBTQ kids. Because the incumbents voted back in we’re not beloved. Or even liked. They are just better than 4 years of Mothers of Liberty running school libraries.

This is simply what Democrats do - vote in the same nutters over and over again. If even ONE Republican had been elected to the SB, that would have provided at least a tiny bit of balance. But no. We are destined to relive four more painfully unproductive years, putting academics at the very bottom of a laundry list filled with social issues. No one to blame but yourselves.

You guys ran on banning books and hating trans kids. That’s not academics, that’s wing nut.

We've already debunked your idiot "banning" books - now do tell us how we ran on "hating trans kids." Provide specific examples.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Awfully quiet in here.

Is it?

Sounds like teachers don’t think that book is a useful resource in the classroom anymore. That’s not banning.

The struggle for fascists to feel like not fascists is real, I’m sure, but I also think you guys are currently beyond redemption.

OMG. I can't even with your moving the goalposts every time Democrats are caught being hypocrites - which is every single day. You people are such a joke.
DP

Okay?

“Banning” is a real word with a specific meaning. What these teachers did isn’t “banning.” What the Orwellian named “Moms for Liberty” is doing is banning. Several elected Republicans have been giddy about banning and burning books.

Your party is fascist.

So - just to be clear - you consider keeping school libraries full of AGE-APPROPRIATE books to be "banning," even though the books in question are widely available at any bookstore, public library, Amazon, etc. But somehow, teachers saying "To Kill a Mockingbird" is inappropriate and will not be part of the required curriculum, is NOT banning.

Also, exactly which elected Republican is "giddy about banning and [b]burning books"? We'll wait while you dredge up some BS from a LWNJ propaganda site.[/b]

Will students be able to check out To Kill a Mockingbird from the school library if they want to, even if teachers don't put it in the curriculum? Yes or no?

I don't know the answer to that question, but bravo on deflecting from the question YOU were asked first. Still waiting on an answer and specific examples.

And yet you refuse to answer the question of where the sex acts in Maus are. Or how deciding to not demand To Kill a Mockingbird be in a school curriculum is the exact same thing as removing it from a school entirely so any kid who wanted to read it would have to go out of their way to find a copy.

Still waiting on an answer for both those.

JFC. YOU ARE TALKING TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. I never said anything about Hustler or Maus. And it's clear that you aren't able to answer the question asked of you, bolded for your convenience. Noted.

You are also talking to different people.

Watch any DeSantis video on his idiotic book bans. Smug is basically politician giddy. That dumb ducker’s smug and giddy as hell about banning books. Or he was when he thought it would get him to be the nominee.

And this fella in Missouri was pretty excited about book burning too, until he got some negative blowback and decided to call it figurative. https://apnews.com/article/flamethrower-missouri-governor-candidate-violent-6055f2c73bc10c8c58fae1d161c9c91e

There. You are wrong and I am right and banning books is fascist.