Run Glen Younkin run Glen Younkin

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

Have you even read American Psycho? It doesn’t sound like it.

Who gets to define age appropriate? You? Sounds like you just support banning books just only according to your own criteria.

School media specialists, in accordance with school system policies. See here, for example: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/iib.pdf

And I would also like to know why you are afraid that a random child who is not your child might choose to read a book that is in a school library. What, exactly, is the concern?

We all are a part of the community. That means that we are all interested in all of our children. Even yours.

But the community doesn't support your POV, polling wise so why do YOU get to decide? Your opinion is in the minority.

Not really. The vast majority of parents do not want sexual material provided to children in schools. You are in a bubble. Youngkin was literally elected because of education and school issues. Trans stuff and gender queer for 11 year olds is not a winning issue for the Dems. If you want to win elections for the Dems in VA, you should stick to abortion and drop the lawn boy crusade.

and now the voters have buyer's remorse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

Have you even read American Psycho? It doesn’t sound like it.

Who gets to define age appropriate? You? Sounds like you just support banning books just only according to your own criteria.

School media specialists, in accordance with school system policies. See here, for example: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/iib.pdf

And I would also like to know why you are afraid that a random child who is not your child might choose to read a book that is in a school library. What, exactly, is the concern?

We all are a part of the community. That means that we are all interested in all of our children. Even yours.

But the community doesn't support your POV, polling wise so why do YOU get to decide? Your opinion is in the minority.

Not really. The vast majority of parents do not want sexual material provided to children in schools. You are in a bubble. Youngkin was literally elected because of education and school issues. Trans stuff and gender queer for 11 year olds is not a winning issue for the Dems. If you want to win elections for the Dems in VA, you should stick to abortion and drop the lawn boy crusade.

and now the voters have buyer's remorse

+1 his approval has been dropping

And even the majority of republicans don't support school book bans. It's a vocal minority, but it's not what "the people" support in terms of polling.
https://thehill.com/homenews/education/4032438-nearly-half-of-republicans-oppose-book-bans-poll/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

Have you even read American Psycho? It doesn’t sound like it.

Who gets to define age appropriate? You? Sounds like you just support banning books just only according to your own criteria.

School media specialists, in accordance with school system policies. See here, for example: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/iib.pdf

And I would also like to know why you are afraid that a random child who is not your child might choose to read a book that is in a school library. What, exactly, is the concern?

We all are a part of the community. That means that we are all interested in all of our children. Even yours.

But the community doesn't support your POV, polling wise so why do YOU get to decide? Your opinion is in the minority.

Not really. The vast majority of parents do not want sexual material provided to children in schools. You are in a bubble. Youngkin was literally elected because of education and school issues. Trans stuff and gender queer for 11 year olds is not a winning issue for the Dems. If you want to win elections for the Dems in VA, you should stick to abortion and drop the lawn boy crusade.

and now the voters have buyer's remorse

+1 his approval has been dropping

And even the majority of republicans don't support school book bans. It's a vocal minority, but it's not what "the people" support in terms of polling.
https://thehill.com/homenews/education/4032438-nearly-half-of-republicans-oppose-book-bans-poll/

We all know you can make polls say whatever you want based on wording. Most people oppose banning Huck Finn but that doesn’t mean they want “lawn boy” provided to their 10 year old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

Have you even read American Psycho? It doesn’t sound like it.

Who gets to define age appropriate? You? Sounds like you just support banning books just only according to your own criteria.

School media specialists, in accordance with school system policies. See here, for example: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/iib.pdf

And I would also like to know why you are afraid that a random child who is not your child might choose to read a book that is in a school library. What, exactly, is the concern?

We all are a part of the community. That means that we are all interested in all of our children. Even yours.

But the community doesn't support your POV, polling wise so why do YOU get to decide? Your opinion is in the minority.

Not really. The vast majority of parents do not want sexual material provided to children in schools. You are in a bubble. Youngkin was literally elected because of education and school issues. Trans stuff and gender queer for 11 year olds is not a winning issue for the Dems. If you want to win elections for the Dems in VA, you should stick to abortion and drop the lawn boy crusade.

and now the voters have buyer's remorse

+1 his approval has been dropping

And even the majority of republicans don't support school book bans. It's a vocal minority, but it's not what "the people" support in terms of polling.
https://thehill.com/homenews/education/4032438-nearly-half-of-republicans-oppose-book-bans-poll/

We all know you can make polls say whatever you want based on wording. Most people oppose banning Huck Finn but that doesn’t mean they want “lawn boy” provided to their 10 year old.

FFS with the inaccurate hysterics again. Spare me. It's age appropriate for highschool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

Have you even read American Psycho? It doesn’t sound like it.

Who gets to define age appropriate? You? Sounds like you just support banning books just only according to your own criteria.

School media specialists, in accordance with school system policies. See here, for example: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/iib.pdf

And I would also like to know why you are afraid that a random child who is not your child might choose to read a book that is in a school library. What, exactly, is the concern?

We all are a part of the community. That means that we are all interested in all of our children. Even yours.

But the community doesn't support your POV, polling wise so why do YOU get to decide? Your opinion is in the minority.

Not really. The vast majority of parents do not want sexual material provided to children in schools. You are in a bubble. Youngkin was literally elected because of education and school issues. Trans stuff and gender queer for 11 year olds is not a winning issue for the Dems. If you want to win elections for the Dems in VA, you should stick to abortion and drop the lawn boy crusade.

and now the voters have buyer's remorse

+1 his approval has been dropping

And even the majority of republicans don't support school book bans. It's a vocal minority, but it's not what "the people" support in terms of polling.
https://thehill.com/homenews/education/4032438-nearly-half-of-republicans-oppose-book-bans-poll/

We all know you can make polls say whatever you want based on wording. Most people oppose banning Huck Finn but that doesn’t mean they want “lawn boy” provided to their 10 year old.

Like drug dealers, standing on the corner, only they're handing out books. JUST SAY NO!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

Have you even read American Psycho? It doesn’t sound like it.

Who gets to define age appropriate? You? Sounds like you just support banning books just only according to your own criteria.

School media specialists, in accordance with school system policies. See here, for example: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/iib.pdf

And I would also like to know why you are afraid that a random child who is not your child might choose to read a book that is in a school library. What, exactly, is the concern?

The correct answer to PPs question is - Parents. WTH is a “school media specialist?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

Have you even read American Psycho? It doesn’t sound like it.

Who gets to define age appropriate? You? Sounds like you just support banning books just only according to your own criteria.

School media specialists, in accordance with school system policies. See here, for example: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/iib.pdf

And I would also like to know why you are afraid that a random child who is not your child might choose to read a book that is in a school library. What, exactly, is the concern?

The correct answer to PPs question is - Parents. WTH is a “school media specialist?”

WTH is a teacher? WTH is a principal? WTH is a superintendent? Why do we have any of those things? Parents should be in charge of everything!@@@@@@@@@@@@2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

Have you even read American Psycho? It doesn’t sound like it.

Who gets to define age appropriate? You? Sounds like you just support banning books just only according to your own criteria.

School media specialists, in accordance with school system policies. See here, for example: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/iib.pdf

And I would also like to know why you are afraid that a random child who is not your child might choose to read a book that is in a school library. What, exactly, is the concern?

We all are a part of the community. That means that we are all interested in all of our children. Even yours.

But the community doesn't support your POV, polling wise so why do YOU get to decide? Your opinion is in the minority.

Not really. The vast majority of parents do not want sexual material provided to children in schools. You are in a bubble. Youngkin was literally elected because of education and school issues. Trans stuff and gender queer for 11 year olds is not a winning issue for the Dems. If you want to win elections for the Dems in VA, you should stick to abortion and drop the lawn boy crusade.

We are discussing high school libraries FFS. Stop lying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

This is the point. The Rs are fearmongering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

Why are you giving books to other people’s kids?

Do you know how libraries work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:republicans have truly become the anti choice party.

They want a choice only when it benefits them.

God forbid your middle school child learns how sex works. Suprise, he's rubbing one out every night in his bedroom anyways. Get over it you prudes.

Thanks for displaying the kind of "intellect" the left represents. Wow.

I grew up going to a Catholic school in Potomac and kids were getting HJs in the back of the rooms at school dances, myself included. Middle school in the 90s in a conservative catholic school. What do you think is happening now? Get over yourself. Your kids are into sex, one way or another.

Kids are actually much less sexually active than they were when we were in high school and middle school in the 90s.

Because they are all watching half naked girls on tik tok/instagram and rubbing one out in their bathroom

These books are nowhere as scandalous as social media.

And are public schools showing sexual TikToks to students? Nope. You are not making the case you think you are. Quite the opposite, in fact.
DP

The point is your kids are seeing these images one way or another. Who cares if it's in a book at school.

Just admit you're a prude. Sex is not taboo for middle school kids nowadays. It's everywhere you look. Heck, PG13 movies have sex in them and middle schoolers are watching those movies. I'm not advocating you watch porn with your kid, but you all need to be realistic. They will find it out one way or another and the other avenues, outside of books at schools, are far worse.

Only weird conservative prudes think sex is taboo. You'll be in for a rude awakening when your kid starts exploring in unhealthy ways.

Wow, are you clueless. I’m hardly a prude - got a good laugh out of that. However, as a PARENT, I recognize that graphic sexual material is not for kids. Of course they’ll find it online regardless, but that doesn’t mean schools need to provide that material to them. It’s beyond bizarre that you think school libraries are the place for porn. As several posters have said, just take your kids to the public library or order them all the graphically sexual material you want from Amazon. School libraries are completely inappropriate places for this trash to be accessible.

You’re most likely not even a parent at all - just the usual troll insisting kids NEED easy access to this garbage. And btw - I’m an independent, but people like you definitely make Democrats look repulsive.

How old are your kids?

Ages 17-24. And yours? Do you even have kids?

Yes, of course. It's a mommy website. 11-16

How did your kids learn about blowjobs, dildos, masturbation, etc?

Did they have cell phones?

Good grief, you're thick. THE POINT is that school libraries are not appropriate places for this crap. We get that you can't get enough of it and want to make sure your kids get their hands on it as soon as possible, but there is no reason for explicit books to be in the SCHOOL LIBRARY. Get it?

They are simple questions. Where did your kids learn about these things?

And what if your kid was questioning their sexuality/identity. Would you support them reading books written by others to learn about their experiences?

No. I would support them talking first to their parents.

What if they weren’t comfortable with that?

Waiting to hear...what if your kids aren't comfortable talking to you? Where should they seek out information?

Crickets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

Have you even read American Psycho? It doesn’t sound like it.

Who gets to define age appropriate? You? Sounds like you just support banning books just only according to your own criteria.

School media specialists, in accordance with school system policies. See here, for example: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/iib.pdf

And I would also like to know why you are afraid that a random child who is not your child might choose to read a book that is in a school library. What, exactly, is the concern?

We all are a part of the community. That means that we are all interested in all of our children. Even yours.

But the community doesn't support your POV, polling wise so why do YOU get to decide? Your opinion is in the minority.

Not really. The vast majority of parents do not want sexual material provided to children in schools. You are in a bubble. Youngkin was literally elected because of education and school issues. Trans stuff and gender queer for 11 year olds is not a winning issue for the Dems. If you want to win elections for the Dems in VA, you should stick to abortion and drop the lawn boy crusade.

We are discussing high school libraries FFS. Stop lying.

You’re right, Providing Gender Queer to 13 year olds vs 11 year olds makes it winning issue for the Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The books are not porn. Describing a sexual act - even with pictures - does not automatically make something porn. Folks are ignoring that the books are essentially the same as Judy Blume in graphic novel form.

Not porn.

x1 million

The books being debated are not porn.

American Psycho isn’t porn. Should I give it to your 14 year old?

You could. I read Stephen King and Dean Koontz in highschool. What's your point?

If you are OK with giving 14 year olds material with graphic scenes of sexual torture, we have nothing to discuss.

I am ok with kids having access to books and believe banning is a slippery slope. Plus the Bible contains language about sexual torture and I don't believe in double standards.

Dean Koontz has a scene that involves the bad dude shoving a live bat into a women's vagina. Read it in highschool. Grew up to be a mild mannered mom in a monogamous marriage.

What exactly is your fear? That kids having access to a variety of books will turn them into psycho killers?

I don't have this fear. Hence I'm ok with the books being in libraries as long as age appropriate and yes, ok in highschool.

Have you even read American Psycho? It doesn’t sound like it.

Who gets to define age appropriate? You? Sounds like you just support banning books just only according to your own criteria.

School media specialists, in accordance with school system policies. See here, for example: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/iib.pdf

And I would also like to know why you are afraid that a random child who is not your child might choose to read a book that is in a school library. What, exactly, is the concern?

We all are a part of the community. That means that we are all interested in all of our children. Even yours.

But the community doesn't support your POV, polling wise so why do YOU get to decide? Your opinion is in the minority.

Not really. The vast majority of parents do not want sexual material provided to children in schools. You are in a bubble. Youngkin was literally elected because of education and school issues. Trans stuff and gender queer for 11 year olds is not a winning issue for the Dems. If you want to win elections for the Dems in VA, you should stick to abortion and drop the lawn boy crusade.

We are discussing high school libraries FFS. Stop lying.

You’re right, Providing Gender Queer to 13 year olds vs 11 year olds makes it winning issue for the Democrats.

Again, high school libraries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We’re not book banners. We’re porn banners. On the contrary it is the left that is into banning books; for example, classics like To Kill A Mockingbird and Tom Sawyer.

Nope, you're book banners. Even taking your word for it that the books are porn - your goal is to ban books.

DP. Do you think the book “Irreversible Damage” should be available in high school libraries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:republicans have truly become the anti choice party.

They want a choice only when it benefits them.

God forbid your middle school child learns how sex works. Suprise, he's rubbing one out every night in his bedroom anyways. Get over it you prudes.

Thanks for displaying the kind of "intellect" the left represents. Wow.

I grew up going to a Catholic school in Potomac and kids were getting HJs in the back of the rooms at school dances, myself included. Middle school in the 90s in a conservative catholic school. What do you think is happening now? Get over yourself. Your kids are into sex, one way or another.

Kids are actually much less sexually active than they were when we were in high school and middle school in the 90s.

Because they are all watching half naked girls on tik tok/instagram and rubbing one out in their bathroom

These books are nowhere as scandalous as social media.

And are public schools showing sexual TikToks to students? Nope. You are not making the case you think you are. Quite the opposite, in fact.
DP

The point is your kids are seeing these images one way or another. Who cares if it's in a book at school.

Just admit you're a prude. Sex is not taboo for middle school kids nowadays. It's everywhere you look. Heck, PG13 movies have sex in them and middle schoolers are watching those movies. I'm not advocating you watch porn with your kid, but you all need to be realistic. They will find it out one way or another and the other avenues, outside of books at schools, are far worse.

Only weird conservative prudes think sex is taboo. You'll be in for a rude awakening when your kid starts exploring in unhealthy ways.

Wow, are you clueless. I’m hardly a prude - got a good laugh out of that. However, as a PARENT, I recognize that graphic sexual material is not for kids. Of course they’ll find it online regardless, but that doesn’t mean schools need to provide that material to them. It’s beyond bizarre that you think school libraries are the place for porn. As several posters have said, just take your kids to the public library or order them all the graphically sexual material you want from Amazon. School libraries are completely inappropriate places for this trash to be accessible.

You’re most likely not even a parent at all - just the usual troll insisting kids NEED easy access to this garbage. And btw - I’m an independent, but people like you definitely make Democrats look repulsive.

How old are your kids?

Ages 17-24. And yours? Do you even have kids?

Yes, of course. It's a mommy website. 11-16

How did your kids learn about blowjobs, dildos, masturbation, etc?

Did they have cell phones?

Good grief, you're thick. THE POINT is that school libraries are not appropriate places for this crap. We get that you can't get enough of it and want to make sure your kids get their hands on it as soon as possible, but there is no reason for explicit books to be in the SCHOOL LIBRARY. Get it?

They are simple questions. Where did your kids learn about these things?

And what if your kid was questioning their sexuality/identity. Would you support them reading books written by others to learn about their experiences?

No. I would support them talking first to their parents.

What if they weren’t comfortable with that?

Waiting to hear...what if your kids aren't comfortable talking to you? Where should they seek out information?

DP. If my kids weren’t comfortable talking to me or my spouse, we would ask them if they’d like to talk with a therapist or counselor. We wouldn’t say, “Hey, try your luck at the school library! Maybe you can glean some insight from a poorly written, sexually graphic book that demonstrates dildo use!” What a stupid question, but so unsurprising.