Your worldview is fine with lying, including lying by omission, to all races so one race doesn't feel bad about the the things their race did to harm another race in the past? This should be so offensive to anyone who cares about education, telling the truth and accepting the realities of the past. "The version of the publisher’s first grade textbook currently in use speaks directly to the discriminatory law in Alabama that Rosa Parks broke in 1955. The initial revised version, however, stated only that Parks “was told to move to a different seat because of the color of her skin.” A second revised text said only that she “was told to move to a different seat.”
I think we are discussing different things. I do not support the omission of such things. I was specifically referring to affirmative action in my comment.
DeSantis won his first election to become Governor by less than 1%. But he ruled the State as if he had the support of 100%. He catered exclusively to right-wing EXTREMISTS, ignoring any and all opposition to his extremism. Since winning his 2nd term by a much larger margin, he's been emboldened and gotten more dictatorial. He even brags about finding ways (that no previous President has used) to impose his will on America if he's elected President. Scary stuff.
And yet, transgender adults are having their access to gender-affirming care restricted, which is causing them harm---harm you sought to deny. You should also not be able to harm transgender children by stripping them, their parents, and their doctors' of the right to determine what treatments are best for them. I happen to think I was quite clear on how to handle the question of age appropriateness. And it wasn't "no test." Don't even try this. I spoke of people being harmed in relation to people leaving the state, and you denied that harm. Don't try to move the goal-posts. Should parents have a say? Sure. And they do when they vote in a school board. They also have the right to offer public comment at school board meetings, including on the appropriateness of books in the school library. Should parents "decide" what is in school libraries? Hell no. Are we going to hold a vote among the parents every time the librarian considers purchasing books or removing books from the shelves that aren't being used? Is that the case? Dude, you're the one who offered an insulting, dismissive response when I responded to a different poster that I can understand why people who are being harmed want out of Florida. You didn't come at this from the standpoint of wanting a "real conversation."
I cant wait to see how much you guys think a librarian should decide when the librarian is a maga that only wants Trumps book and a King James Bible in the library. It's nonsense. A single person shouldnt decide this. For many reasons.
That would violate the First Amendment, as would a liberal librarian who only wanted Barack Obama books. (And I would hope that the school would fire both those librarians.) But you'll be shocked to find out that librarians are capable of putting the kids over politics and try to maintain a wide range of books and voices. Indeed, that's what groups like the Moms Against Liberty are so upset over. Regardless, you're deflecting from what my actual point was.
It's funny, because as things currently stand, one person can decide what's in the library in terms of making an objection. Only one person's objection is needed to remove a book from being available for all others. The other side not only wants to decide what they want to read, what their kids should read - they want to decide what should be available for everyone. It's really indefensible.
To the extent anyone is actually concerned about subjective and partisan commentary being inserted into the story of Rosa Parks, for example, how about starting with an evaluation of the public records? This could also help students learn to find and analyze source materials. The Police Report: An Act of Courage, The Arrest Records of Rosa Parks We received a call upon arrival the bus operator said he had a colored female sitting in the white section of the bus, and would not move back. We (Day & Mixon) also saw her. The bus operator signed a warrant for her. Rosa Parks (cf), 634 Cleveland Court. Rosa Parks (cf) was charged with chapter 6 section 11 of the Montgomery City Code.
You know who should decide whether a book should be banned for their child? The parent. But that parent shouldn’t have the right to have the book banned for the other children whose parents do not share the same culture of concealment. But DeSantis has pushed this ass-backwards. He has made it the purview of one parent to decide whether books should be deprived to all students.
Not only that, but he and his cronies have designed a system that imposes a ton of costs on school districts that refuse to ban books while not imposing those costs on school districts that do ban books. How? They force school districts to pay for a costly process, including a magistrate, when they refuse to ban books and a single person objects, but they don't force school districts to use that same process when it bans a book and numerous parents want to object to that decision. Just utter absurdity.
Surprised? Doubt it. My mom is a librarian and lifelong educator. I am deflecting nothing. 1A has limits. Kids should not be exposed to some of the garbage that you are defending.
Really? I guess we should remove internet filters from school libraries too? I mean that is just censorship that some parents may be against right?
You ever have issues with you kids' books in school? Me either. Isn't the issue that there is a difference in monitoring age appropriateness of books and banning concepts from school? Two gay kids kissing in a book should be treated like two straight characters kissing in a book. I mean Julia in 1984 is very promiscuous and sex is frankly discussed as I recall.
Yes, deflecting. You dismissed that people are suffering harm. I offered a number of examples of harms, none of which included the book banning (which is indeed harmful behavior but not at the top of the list of awful things DeSantis and his cronies are doing).
All true, but just by responding as such, you've given them a bit of a victory. If you were in an actual debate with a person that favors the DeSantis view of history, they would then throw up another objection to honoring her. It's all just throwing crap at the wall and acting like her legacy is actually disputable and worthy of debate. Then they can say it's controversial and being debated, and that their view is equally worthy. The whole point is to act like there is a legitimate both sides when there isn't.
Garbage… such as… ??? When did this major issue of filth and garbage in libraries even first occur to you? Think real hard on this. Did you have a problem with librarians 10 years ago? 5 years ago? I’m guessing MUCH more recent, just like trannies in sports and the not un-related CRT freak out , it occurred to you exactly when the right wing media masters started pushing for it. Hmm. It’s almost like you are being manipulated. The funny thing at least there were one or two actual famous examples to cite(incessantly) on the sports issue. Where is the “filth” in public libraries? The way some frame it, you’d think libraries have a porn section in the back or something. It’s quite deranged
I am disgusted that one parent can decide the literary curriculum for an entire class. If that very idea doesn’t disgust you, we will never be in agreement in the point.
Fair point. But if someone is claiming their interest is historical accuracy (which may be true for some and not for others), I think a discussion of source materials might help separate the wheat from the chaff a bit. Another example I was thinking of was with how we talk about the Civil War. Many Southerners including teachers many of us had, tried to downplay or categorically dispute the role of slavery and the related racial animus involved. Those sorts of arguments can be debunked simply by reading the Declarations of Secession and other official records of the day. I'm not conceding that those materials should end the discussion of course.
I think anyone wanting to have a serious debate about the legitimacy of the historical legacy of Rosa Parks in 2023 is not interested in actual truth.
