Utah students can no longer bring personal copies of banned books to school [Lucky thing SLC reversed its ban on the Bible]

[ozso]

Poppycock. It is a matter of what is pornography or not. There is a legitimate claim that some sensible items must be allowed to be discussed and explored. No matter how uncomfortable that might make some people.

No that's the guise it's been going under. It got pretty good traction for a while, but it's coming to an end.

 

[RileyG]

Nope. Public opinion is strongly in favor of gay rights and it is only a vocal minority who are hollering about books being made available. The same vocal minority that hollers about any thing pro lgbt.

Putting public opinion aside, plenty of conservative Christians, Jews, or Muslims, whether you like it or not, do not want LGBT+ taught in public schools because, from their perspective, they don’t agree with ideology.

My only thought is who cares? It doesn’t need to be taught because it has NOTHING to do with education.

If students want to learn about LGBT+ they can ask their parents at home.

It’s the same reason why we don’t teach RELIGION in public schools, even though many will argue “it’s part of who a person is.”

And yes, LGBT+ very much functions like a cult.

Source: my experiences

 

[ozso]

Nope. Public opinion is strongly in favor of gay rights and it is only a vocal minority who are hollering about books being made available. The same vocal minority that hollers about any thing pro lgbt.

You're basically claiming that what you're protesting against happening isn't really happening.

 

[Belk]

No that's the guise it's been going under. It got pretty good traction for a while, but it's coming to an end.

So many who don't understand the first amendment have claimed.

 

[Belk]

Putting public opinion aside, plenty of conservative Christians, Jews, or Muslims, whether you like it or not, do not want LGBT+ taught in public schools because, from their perspective, they don’t agree with ideology.

I don't care that it offends their sensibilities. Just like I'm indifferent to those who are upset at racial equality or evolution.

My only thought is who cares? It doesn’t need to be taught because it has NOTHING to do with education.

If students want to learn about LGBT+ they can ask their parents at home.

Nope. Just like racial issues and scientific consensus there is a valid place for it in a secular school system.

It’s the same reason why we don’t teach RELIGION in public schools, even though many will argue “it’s part of who a person is.”

No, the reason we don't teach religion is that it violates the first amendment. We certainly do teach about subjects that touch upon religion existing and the need for religious tolerance. The same holds true for lgbt issues.

And yes, LGBT+ very much functions like a cult.

Source: my experiences

Your personal experience as someone who refuses to look at any other point of view is noted.

 

[Belk]

You're basically claiming that what you're protesting against happening isn't really happening.

That's an interesting interpretation.

 

[Always in His Presence]

It was not a rape depiction - I'm beginning to wonder if you ever opened the book. It is a young boy describing (with graphic illustrations) the sex act with an older male. It hides nothing, and I don't understand how an adult could support it's dissemination to children

It's child pornography.

Child pornography is a form of child sexual exploitation. Federal law defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (persons less than 18 years old). Images of child pornography are also referred to as child sexual abuse images.​

Federal law prohibits the production, distribution, importation, reception, or possession of any image of child pornography. A violation of federal child pornography laws is a serious crime, and convicted offenders face fines severe statutory penalties​

​

Child Pornography

www.justice.gov

I’m not arguing with your definition. But when it’s written in literature or portrayed in movies, can it be considered “pornography?” So to speak?

The law is plain.

I cannot fathom people making excuses and defending it.

It is the depiction of a CHILD performing oral sex on an older male.

It is wrong, immoral and always will be

 

[Always in His Presence]

Same here. The 1990s. Plenty of pictures and videos of me and my brothers in the bath tub.

Child pornography is a form of child sexual exploitation. Federal law defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (persons less than 18 years old). Images of child pornography are also referred to as child sexual abuse images.

 

[ozso]

That's an interesting interpretation.

Well you're protesting over books that have been banned, while at the same time claiming that only an insignificant minority are against those books.

 

[Belk]

Well you're protesting over books that have been banned, while at the same time claiming that only an insignificant minority are against those books.

Are you under the impression it requires a majority to ban a book?

 

[ozso]

Are you under the impression it requires a majority to ban a book?

If it's only a minority against those books being in public school, how did they overwhelm the majority?

 

[RileyG]

Child pornography is a form of child sexual exploitation. Federal law defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (persons less than 18 years old). Images of child pornography are also referred to as child sexual abuse images.

To be blunt, it wasn't sexual, and no pictures or videos of "privates" exist.

 

[Belk]

If it's only a minority against those books being in public school, how did they overwhelm the majority?

So you do believe it requires a majority to ban the books. That is not how it works in most cases. Generally it simply requires a motivated minority.

A book ban occurs when a concerned individual or group formally "challenges" a book, typically by filing a request with a library or school to remove it from circulation, citing reasons like inappropriate content, offensive language, or age-inappropriateness; if the challenge is upheld by a review process, the book is then considered "banned" and removed from access.

 

[ozso]

So you do believe it requires a majority to ban the books. That is not how it works in most cases. Generally it simply requires a motivated minority.

A book ban occurs when a concerned individual or group formally "challenges" a book, typically by filing a request with a library or school to remove it from circulation, citing reasons like inappropriate content, offensive language, or age-inappropriateness; if the challenge is upheld by a review process, the book is then considered "banned" and removed from access.

And the majority who want the book left in the school library are powerless to prevent its removal?

 

[Belk]

And the majority who want the book left in the school library are powerless to prevent its removal?

Sometimes. Sometimes they are not even aware. One of the issues with representative democracy is the representation does not follow one to one with what people desire.

 

[RileyG]

I don't care that it offends their sensibilities. Just like I'm indifferent to those who are upset at racial equality or evolution.

Nope. Just like racial issues and scientific consensus there is a valid place for it in a secular school system.



No, the reason we don't teach religion is that it violates the first amendment. We certainly do teach about subjects that touch upon religion existing and the need for religious tolerance. The same holds true for lgbt issues.

Your personal experience as someone who refuses to look at any other point of view is noted.

No. This has nothing to do with their "sensibilities" and even from a secular viewpoint they shouldn't teach it. It's just an agenda.

I mean, if religion exists, then NO they cannot teach LGBT issues because it very much functions as a cult. IMO.

Personal experience? Until you have a loved one who is DEEPLY hurt by the LGBT+ agenda, then no, I will not see any of these "stories" as credible. Sorry.

 

[RileyG]

Sometimes. Sometimes they are not even aware. One of the issues with representative democracy is the representation does not follow one to one with what people desire.

Pornography doesn't belong in public schools.

End of discussion.

 

[ozso]

Sometimes. Sometimes they are not even aware. One of the issues with representative democracy is the representation does not follow one to one with what people desire.

Voters overwhelmingly oppose sexually explicit books in public school libraries, and believe schools have an obligation to inform parents what their children are being taught.

Voters Against Obscene Books in Public Schools

Voters overwhelmingly oppose sexually explicit books in public school libraries, and believe schools have an obligation to inform parents what their children are being taught.

www.rasmussenreports.com

 

[Always in His Presence]

To be blunt, it wasn't sexual, and no pictures or videos of "privates" exist.

To be blunt you are 100% wrong. You can google the picture.

As I have repeatedly stated I can’t post the pictures here without being permabanned

 

[Belk]

No. This has nothing to do with their "sensibilities" and even from a secular viewpoint they shouldn't teach it. It's just an agenda.

Nope. Not just an agenda. It is real people who have suffered real oppression and face real challenges in the world. Challenges such as people attempting to label their fight for freedom as an "agenda" in order to minimize and attempt to suppress them.

I mean, if religion exists, then NO they cannot teach LGBT issues because it very much functions as a cult. IMO.

I don't care about your opinion, I care about facts. I see no facts supporting the idea it functions as a cult.

Personal experience? Until you have a loved one who is DEEPLY hurt by the LGBT+ agenda, then no, I will not see any of these "stories" as credible. Sorry.

Yes. You have already declared you will not look at the opposing viewpoint. No need to keep reiterating it.