Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The meeting was nonsense.

Well it worked, and now the books are banned .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat. Like many Democrats, I think the graphic novel isnt appropriate for school. Thats fairly obvious from the pics. The lawn boy book, Im holding my opinion until I read it myself as many have said that the passages shared were out of context.

That said, why are so many posters upthread making this blanket “Democrats are pedophiles!!! All of em!!” Type of statements? That is no way to get anyone on your side because it makes you sound judgemental and crazy.

When the people opposing the book's inclusion in public school libraries are called "Trumphumpers", and other Republican candidates are dragged into it, AND the elected officials offering vigorous defense are Democrats, AND there is no news of other Dem elected officials opposing it, people aren't baselessly drawing the conclusion that this is something that modern Democrats support.

If there are Fairfax Democratic party officials or elected officials condemning this, I hope someone will post.

Anonymous wrote:The meeting was nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Double and triple down.

These are your Democrats people.

The sad thing is these folks think they are being clever with this type of rhetorical jiu jitsu. Normal people see through it as an obvious attempt to deflect and avoid dealing with the problem.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Young people explore their sexuality. There is nothing deviant about that.

You have done weird hang-ups.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat. Like many Democrats, I think the graphic novel isnt appropriate for school. Thats fairly obvious from the pics. The lawn boy book, Im holding my opinion until I read it myself as many have said that the passages shared were out of context.

That said, why are so many posters upthread making this blanket “Democrats are pedophiles!!! All of em!!” Type of statements? That is no way to get anyone on your side because it makes you sound judgemental and crazy.

Is it any different than the pro-book posters calling opponents RWNJs? The name-calling is extreme in both directions.

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat. Like many Democrats, I think the graphic novel isnt appropriate for school. Thats fairly obvious from the pics. The lawn boy book, Im holding my opinion until I read it myself as many have said that the passages shared were out of context.

That said, why are so many posters upthread making this blanket “Democrats are pedophiles!!! All of em!!” Type of statements? That is no way to get anyone on your side because it makes you sound judgemental and crazy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Double and triple down.

These are your Democrats people.

The sad thing is these folks think they are being clever with this type of rhetorical jiu jitsu. Normal people see through it as an obvious attempt to deflect and avoid dealing with the problem.

We cannot convince someone into having a moral compass. It's like throwing a bouncing ball at a wall. It will never catch it. It will just keep.coming.back. with more devil's advocacy, arguing and arguing for arguments sake really. I think they enjoy the banter, plus feeling like one of the group think Borg and repeating whatever they heard from the cube. "Resistance is futile!"

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat. Like many Democrats, I think the graphic novel isnt appropriate for school. Thats fairly obvious from the pics. The lawn boy book, Im holding my opinion until I read it myself as many have said that the passages shared were out of context.

That said, why are so many posters upthread making this blanket “Democrats are pedophiles!!! All of em!!” Type of statements? That is no way to get anyone on your side because it makes you sound judgemental and crazy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anything good came out of these past 18 or so months, it's that parents were and are actually watching school board work sessions and meetings in large numbers.

And how do parents keep doing that if people are celebrating a woman who is reading porn with no heads up during a work session? Some of us are watching or listening and monitoring young kids. Now we can’t watch because members of the community are using the meeting to broadcast porn? You think the FCC isn’t getting complaints and won’t fine someone?

FCPS— the first county in the nation to have to broadcast SB meeting on a time delay.

Who are here people cheering for a women bringing this into my house? There is a Tim and a place. And it’s with adults only present. Not 7 year olds.

I think that's kind of the point she was trying to make: this type of content should be for adults only. No for minors.

Believe it or not, you guys are in agreement; you just might draw the line at a different age as to when its appropriate. But you both believe its not suitable for certain age groups

DP. There is a time, place and manner element that you (and she) are ignoring here. The regular public libraries circulate romance (and other) novels with graphic sexual scenes in them. They are intended or mature readers (although younger readers could get access to them), and are perfectly appropriate for public library circulation. They would not, however, be appropriate to read aloud at a county board meeting for attempted shock value.

Presumably then they are inappropriate for school libraries as well.

It sounds like you have a lot of hang-ups around human sexuality. Why is that?

I have hang ups around exposing children to human sexuality, particularly at school. Why don’t you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Double and triple down.

These are your Democrats people.

The sad thing is these folks think they are being clever with this type of rhetorical jiu jitsu. Normal people see through it as an obvious attempt to deflect and avoid dealing with the problem.

Agreed. However, our flaw is that in the spirit of sincere thought and rational exchanges, we think/hope these folk will be persuaded. As evidenced by this thread, they won't.

What we should be doing (as some have), is calling them out for encouraging the moral decline of the system. Defining deviancy down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anything good came out of these past 18 or so months, it's that parents were and are actually watching school board work sessions and meetings in large numbers.

And how do parents keep doing that if people are celebrating a woman who is reading porn with no heads up during a work session? Some of us are watching or listening and monitoring young kids. Now we can’t watch because members of the community are using the meeting to broadcast porn? You think the FCC isn’t getting complaints and won’t fine someone?

FCPS— the first county in the nation to have to broadcast SB meeting on a time delay.

Who are here people cheering for a women bringing this into my house? There is a Tim and a place. And it’s with adults only present. Not 7 year olds.

I think that's kind of the point she was trying to make: this type of content should be for adults only. No for minors.

Believe it or not, you guys are in agreement; you just might draw the line at a different age as to when its appropriate. But you both believe its not suitable for certain age groups

DP. There is a time, place and manner element that you (and she) are ignoring here. The regular public libraries circulate romance (and other) novels with graphic sexual scenes in them. They are intended or mature readers (although younger readers could get access to them), and are perfectly appropriate for public library circulation. They would not, however, be appropriate to read aloud at a county board meeting for attempted shock value.

Presumably then they are inappropriate for school libraries as well.

It sounds like you have a lot of hang-ups around human sexuality. Why is that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Double and triple down.

These are your Democrats people.

The sad thing is these folks think they are being clever with this type of rhetorical jiu jitsu. Normal people see through it as an obvious attempt to deflect and avoid dealing with the problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anything good came out of these past 18 or so months, it's that parents were and are actually watching school board work sessions and meetings in large numbers.

And how do parents keep doing that if people are celebrating a woman who is reading porn with no heads up during a work session? Some of us are watching or listening and monitoring young kids. Now we can’t watch because members of the community are using the meeting to broadcast porn? You think the FCC isn’t getting complaints and won’t fine someone?

FCPS— the first county in the nation to have to broadcast SB meeting on a time delay.

Who are here people cheering for a women bringing this into my house? There is a Tim and a place. And it’s with adults only present. Not 7 year olds.

I think that's kind of the point she was trying to make: this type of content should be for adults only. No for minors.

Believe it or not, you guys are in agreement; you just might draw the line at a different age as to when its appropriate. But you both believe its not suitable for certain age groups

DP. There is a time, place and manner element that you (and she) are ignoring here. The regular public libraries circulate romance (and other) novels with graphic sexual scenes in them. They are intended or mature readers (although younger readers could get access to them), and are perfectly appropriate for public library circulation. They would not, however, be appropriate to read aloud at a county board meeting for attempted shock value.

Presumably then they are inappropriate for school libraries as well.

Anonymous wrote:Double and triple down.

These are your Democrats people.