Florida book bans - the first step before burning

Eagle_Eye said:
And who are the most susceptible to manipulation in our soceity? That is the main point in my argument.
Click to expand...

My parents did not censor anything. I read whatever I wanted, and if it was behind the librarians' desk I had a note from one of them saying it was okay for me to check it out. I raised my kids the same. If they wanted a book that was controversial, I read it too and then we talked about it why it was controversial. I read "Hiroshima" when I was in grade school. It is quite graphic. But today's kids are exposed to far worse, with the plethora of violence in movies, games, on social media even. The book you referenced supposedly has drawings of sexual acts. Personally I think the idea of anyone under 18 reading that is disgusting, but that is my personal opinion. If my teenager wanted to read that book, I'd get it and we'd look at it together. That alone would discourage any prurient interest. :laugh:

How do you think a book is going to "manipulate" a kid? You just stated that you don't believe books can turn someone gay, or that someone can turn a gay person straight. Simple solution -- put controversial books where they are required to have parental approval to check out, and quit already with the fucking fascist book banning crap.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
That said, if Floridians want to turn their state into a RW shithole like both LA and NYC have become LW shitholes, I support their right to choose. :)
Click to expand...

NYC for a decade or so had the lowest murder rate it had ever had (it bounced around a tiny bit, but stayed close to the lowest). LA for a decade or so had the lowest murder rate it had since the 1950's, and it could be argued that the 1950's rate was only lower because they were worse at detecting murders. These were epic successes at dealing with crime.

Back in the 1970's, NYC was on the verge of collapse. America had given up on it. But for 40 years, it rebuilt itself. It was over my lifetime, so I watched it happen. It was remarkable.

I did not live close to LA, but heard that its rebuilding from riots and major earthquakes was remarkable too.

Do not listen to the alt right when they say NYC is a shit hole. They are 90% lying. It always has major problems (that many people living so close together always will), but it is a huge asset to the USA.
 
Walt said:
And yet she did not get the nomination in 2008?...
Click to expand...

Duh. When did Hillary buy the DNC? After she lost in 2008. LOL

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/d...inton-campaign-control-made-my-job-impossible
Donna Brazile: Bailing out DNC gave Clinton campaign control, ‘made my job impossible’

https://www.npr.org/2017/11/03/5619...-additional-signed-agreement-with-dnc-in-2015
Clinton Campaign Had Additional Signed Agreement With DNC In 2015
What, exactly, did the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign agree to in 2015, before any votes had been cast in the Democratic primary?

The question has roiled Democratic politics since Thursday morning, when Politico published an excerpt of Donna Brazile's upcoming book about the 2016 presidential race.

Brazile took over the DNC as interim chair following Debbie Wasserman Schultz's sudden resignation during the Democratic National Convention. Once she was at the party's helm, Brazile wrote that she discovered an agreement that "specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party's finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff."
Click to expand...
 
Walt said:
NYC for a decade or so had the lowest murder rate it had ever had (it bounced around a tiny bit, but stayed close to the lowest). LA for a decade or so had the lowest murder rate it had since the 1950's, and it could be argued that the 1950's rate was only lower because they were worse at detecting murders. These were epic successes at dealing with crime.

Back in the 1970's, NYC was on the verge of collapse. America had given up on it. But for 40 years, it rebuilt itself. It was over my lifetime, so I watched it happen. It was remarkable.

I did not live close to LA, but heard that its rebuilding from riots and major earthquakes was remarkable too.

Do not listen to the alt right when they say NYC is a shit hole. They are 90% lying. It always has major problems (that many people living so close together always will), but it is a huge asset to the USA.
Click to expand...
I fully support New Yorkers and Californians to run their state and cities as they please. God bless America! :flagsal:
 
TOP said:
Why would a school keep a teacher who doesn't want to be there?
Click to expand...

I do not want to be at my job, and I just got a 20% raise to try to keep me on for a little longer. And that is a 20% raise from compensation that is five times higher than they wanted to pay me.

Employers usually would rather an employee that does not want to do a job to no one at all. The better outcome is to never hire the teacher who will quit midyear. Quite a bit of effort is put into hiring teachers that will stay the full year at least.

My question is: how do you not know all this? All real teachers know this. One of the worst disasters is losing a teacher midyear.

Even when they have to fire a teacher, they will try their best to wait until the end of the year.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
I did not know that.

There was, at least when my kids were going, a stigma against the free lunch kids. Making food free for all would remove that stigma.
Click to expand...

Very true. Free lunches/breakfasts to all students who wants one would be great for our country.
 
Walt said:
Very true. Free lunches/breakfasts to all students who wants one would be great for our country.
Click to expand...

We already pay plenty in taxes but I'd be willing to pay more if it meant kids got fed for free at school. Some of our districts here even offer free meals for pick-up during school breaks.
 
Walt said:
I do not want to be at my job, and I just got a 20% raise to try to keep me on for a little longer. And that is a 20% raise from compensation that is five times higher than they wanted to pay me.

Employers usually would rather an employee that does not want to do a job to no one at all. The better outcome is to never hire the teacher who will quit midyear. Quite a bit of effort is put into hiring teachers that will stay the full year at least.

My question is: how do you not know all this? All real teachers know this. One of the worst disasters is losing a teacher midyear.

Even when they have to fire a teacher, they will try their best to wait until the end of the year.
Click to expand...

You do realize that's not how teaching works.....
Do you actually read anything that I write? I dont think you do......;)
It's very clear you're not familiar with how our schools work and that includes hiring and firing of teachers...
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Do you think any books on sex are appropriate for juniors or seniors? How the reproductive system works? The consequences of pregnancy? STDs?
Click to expand...
Of course that is part of sex ed. Do you believe students should then be shown hard core porn to include, gay and transexuals? At what point do we draw the line?
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
My parents did not censor anything. I read whatever I wanted, and if it was behind the librarians' desk I had a note from one of them saying it was okay for me to check it out. I raised my kids the same. If they wanted a book that was controversial, I read it too and then we talked about it why it was controversial. I read "Hiroshima" when I was in grade school. It is quite graphic. But today's kids are exposed to far worse, with the plethora of violence in movies, games, on social media even. The book you referenced supposedly has drawings of sexual acts. Personally I think the idea of anyone under 18 reading that is disgusting, but that is my personal opinion. If my teenager wanted to read that book, I'd get it and we'd look at it together. That alone would discourage any prurient interest. :laugh:

How do you think a book is going to "manipulate" a kid? You just stated that you don't believe books can turn someone gay, or that someone can turn a gay person straight. Simple solution -- put controversial books where they are required to have parental approval to check out, and quit already with the fucking fascist book banning crap.
Click to expand...

What may be appropriate to one child may not be to the another. Children learn from their parents so who better to decide what books the school gives access to. In an ideal world parents would decide what is taught in school. As that is impossible the we must leave the decisions to the school system. This whole rigamarol is purely politically driven, you are progressive so you endorse liberal ideals. I onthe other hand am more conservative thus I endorse a more conservative approach. Neither of us is totally correct. As to this latest Desantis scandal children will not be harmed. Some things you endorse will most likely be taught at a later date.
 
Eagle_Eye said:
Of course that is part of sex ed. Do you believe students should then be shown hard core porn to include, gay and transexuals? At what point do we draw the line?
Click to expand...

I find that idea repulsive and believe that it should be up to the parents whether their kid has access to that kind of material. But given the nature of the Internet, it's extremely likely that any kid with an interest in that has already seen it.

I looked up the book and it has pics of one guy giving another head. Definitely for mature audiences, and definitely something I would want to give permission for my child to read, after I'd read it first.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
My parents did not censor anything. I read whatever I wanted, and if it was behind the librarians' desk I had a note from one of them saying it was okay for me to check it out. I raised my kids the same. If they wanted a book that was controversial, I read it too and then we talked about it why it was controversial. I read "Hiroshima" when I was in grade school. It is quite graphic. But today's kids are exposed to far worse, with the plethora of violence in movies, games, on social media even. The book you referenced supposedly has drawings of sexual acts. Personally I think the idea of anyone under 18 reading that is disgusting, but that is my personal opinion. If my teenager wanted to read that book, I'd get it and we'd look at it together. That alone would discourage any prurient interest. :laugh:

How do you think a book is going to "manipulate" a kid? You just stated that you don't believe books can turn someone gay, or that someone can turn a gay person straight. Simple solution -- put controversial books where they are required to have parental approval to check out, and quit already with the fucking fascist book banning crap.
Click to expand...

I did not censor what my kids read or faced with. They were lucky enough to live overseas and be exposed to other cultures.
 
Eagle_Eye said:
Of course that is part of sex ed. Do you believe students should then be shown hard core porn to include, gay and transexuals? At what point do we draw the line?
Click to expand...
Not under 18. Who is claiming HS kids are being shown gays buttfucking each other? That's often called "contributing to the delinquency of a minor".
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Bingo. They also want taxpayers to fund educations at parochial/religious schools.

I think the anger against teachers also comes from parents who are stressed with work, don't want to or don't have time to assist their kids with their assignments and homework, and blame the scapegoat who assigned it.
Click to expand...
Yes. Touched on in the latchkey discussion. It's been a long time coming. It used to be common for parents to help kids with homework when we were growing up.

At the very least, checking to see if it's correct, and completed. It was assumed that kids had a support system at home. You cannot simultaneously pack 30+ kids into one classroom AND expect everyone to get a good education. You either slow down the better students by catering to the slower ones, or you completely fail to serve the slower students by accelerating the lessons.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Teachers are routinely vilified by the Alt-Right. This attitude, which seems to have taken root in the 90s, is one major component in the deterioration of the American education system.
Click to expand...
Because there are glaring flaws in the way each state funds education. Our state is mainly property taxes, which obviously puts more money into wealthy districts.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Nope. And that's one of our biggest problems with education these days. During the pandemic, my youngest found that out the hard way. Her district went virtual. She would spend hours creating videos that were fun, engaging, and that involved work-along-with-teacher activities. She printed up -- at her own expense -- the lessons and activities and personally delivered them to the students' homes. Yet when it was the appointed time for the Zoom class, only a few kids attended. She teaches the early childhood/special needs group of 3-5 year olds, so obviously a parent or daycare provider was needed to log the child into the Zoom classes and help them with the activities. This was at a school district in Illinois with lower-income families. Some of the parents even complained to the school that the teachers were giving their kids "too much work" and that's why they didn't make them attend the virtual classroom lessons. These parents were home with the kids, but "too busy" to bother.
Click to expand...
Another issue in the early days of the pandemic was availability of devices in all of the homes. And bandwidth in the schools.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
So you believe that a teacher who has a book in her classroom with a gay character, or an immigrant character, or a black character, or a character with two moms -- is being a SJW. Figures.
Click to expand...
Because DeathSantis wants a society where denying the existence of the individuals you mention will essentially relegate them to the far reaches of the state.
 
Althea said:
Because there are glaring flaws in the way each state funds education. Our state is mainly property taxes, which obviously puts more money into wealthy districts.
Click to expand...

Feds only contribute 8% of school money. What is the solution?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top