Meet the Pensacola English teacher waging war on books

Then why are you asking where the line is drawn, if you know the answer? I like your suggestion that parents be included in educational decisions, including those surrounding curricular materials. It's true to the policy and spirit of public education. Think about the logistics and the realities for a second.

That includes the whacko parents, who are not only terribly misinformed, but also overly involved. Then there is the matter of mechanisms for obtaining parental input. Teachers and school administrators have little to no time to create such mechanisms. A good PTA will compensate for this, as might a good school board. But now we have them to rely upon, increasing the bureaucratic load.

Sure, that load should be handled, but you don't realize the amount of accountability govt school systems have to state and federal legislation (see the requirements for accountability to the Individuals w Disabilities Education Act). Then there are the district and state reporting requirements.

So yes, parents are to be included in crucial educational decisions, but it's far more complicated than the vast majority of Americans realize. Ultimately, the system is more efficient when it relies upon integrity. This trends to those with education and credentials.

 

Unfortunately, this is likely true and part of the message I was extending to @tilly, but it's even more complicated, as you and I noted.

 

Parents being involved with education is fine to a point, but having a narrow minded, small percentage (30% or so) of the population imposing their religious and moral views on the rest of us via using the power of government is scary.

We are in the process of being forced to live like the most ignorant and narrow-minded citizens of our country.

 

And that is a great question. I'd love to have a blanket answer, but honestly it's going to only be my opinion. And it is going to be different than another parent's opinion. The line is squiggly because some approve and some don't and visa versa. There's also the First amendment that allows such free speech to be placed in libraries. Yes?

Religious books should be allowed because kids can explore and open their minds and make their own decisions. Yet there are plenty of topics in the Bible, etc that are not age appropriate for elementary kids, and parents who use the Bible in their homes teach certain age appropriate sections, correct? And as their kids grow, they add more appropriate sections. They don't throw the whole thing at 7 year olds, yet it is there, in elementary schools. First amendment allows it. So why is not only this lady, but many, many others so bent on banning books they don't like? Does the first amendment only apply to what they want in schools when such inappropriate subjects are in the Bible that is allowed?

Two male penguins that raise a baby penguin together on their own volition is on lists to be banned because it supposedly supports and promotes human LGBT couples and is not appropriate for elementary school children. It has zero sex, no sexual connotation, no sexual content, etc. It is banal yet it still offends people. Why is that? Yes, you called the lady a quack, but she is a teacher and is proposing these bans in Pensacola. Should she be allowed to do this? That is an educator making decisions for a parent that is in lockstep with those who want to exclude any mention of LGBT lives, etc.

It is an act against many parents who do support an actual innocent book with no sexual themes. Why does she get her way? What about the parents who disagree? That is why your definitive line idea is ambiguous and not applicable.

That is why people say if you ban those types of books, you need to ban the equivalent heterosexual relationship books. But they aren't trying to ban those are they?

I also see the talk of rape, etc That is pretty much condoned in the Hebrew Bible. Should that be banned?

That line keeps wobbling.

 

It doesn't violate the First because schools make decisions all of the time as to which books will be available in libraries, one of the factors being whether they are age appropriate. If removing a book from a school library is a First Amendment violation, then literally every public children's library in America is guilty of First Amendment violations.

It doesn't violate the Fourteenth Amendment especially if you remove conversations regarding heterosexual couples as well. In such a case, there is definitely no Equal Protection violation. Apart from that argument, there is really no right for one's sexual lifestyle to be represented in a children's library.

 

If your point is that authority figures can't influence children based on their views on religion or what the school frames as acceptable and unacceptable, then that really couldn't be further from the truth.

And liberals know this. That's why they devote time to preaching about sensitivity, diversity, equity, and inclusion, etc. If those meetings couldn't influence people, then they really are just a waste of time for everybody. But they can influence people (especially children who are easily influenced), everyone knows that they can influence people, which is why they do it.

 

But I haven't heard anyone proposing that and arguing that literary descriptions of husbands and wives are inherently age inappropriate. I mean, they could be, but the real issue seems pretty straightforward: that many people believe homosexual relationships are immoral and sinful. I don't think it's much more complicated than that.

 

Should incest topics be free for all to stumble upon?

Should rape topics?

Should gender transition topics be available at any age?

Some here seem to be saying that the parents dont have a say on the matter outside of some lame "keep your kid out of the library" nonsense.

Who makes the choice and where is the line? That is the very clear question that I keep asking.

My answer would be a council of parents with input from admin. And yes, I am fully willing to see books that I support voted down if the parents chose so.

 

I agree with this almost 100%. Apologies if I misunderstood your first post.

 

FTR, I never said the 30% should rule, but their voices should be heard and their concerns should be voiced as part of the process as should the other 70%.

What you not accounting for is that many in that other 70% dont want rape and incest or even gender issues addressed in elementary libraries and would rather their kids get informed by the parent on such issues.

Many of these topics that some extremist see fit for children would never survive the test of a popular vote even among those on the left side of the spectrum.

The truth is probably 70% of us agree on many of these things and 15% on each side feel that no concessions should exist.

 

That’s fine, but the reason people don’t see heterosexual relationships as immoral is because the human race absolutely needs them to survive, that doesn’t mean premarital sexual relationships are viewed in the same light.

But if people are going to claim a breach in rights based on discrimination, don’t get mad at me for calling to remove all of it.

 

In your view, should parents also have final decision-making authority not only with respect to what books are in the library but also what is taught to their kids in the classroom? I can imagine places where a majority of parents on a council might not want their kids being taught about evolution or about aspects of the Civil War. If they can ban a book about evolution in the library, can they ban it from the classroom? And should taxpayers who don't currently have kids in public school have any say in any of this?

 

I personally would understand if the Bible wasnt in elementary libraries because some of those topics without context are very mature.

I think even biblical topics of such dark matters are better discussed in the home and age appropriate guidelines still exist.

My dad has been a minister for 35 years and chooses to not even mention some topics from the pulpit due to the veriety of ages in the audience in his church.

If Christians believe churches should use proper discretion, then asking schools not to in regard to the Bible would be silly.

 

As an aside, just think how much better off the planet would be if we all went gay and stopped having kids. In less than a century the planet would be rid of us. Humans are the worst thing that ever happened to planet earth.

 

Your question has been answered several times.

 

I don't disagree that many people think that, but it's an odd moral analysis to me. Lots of things are not vital to human survival that we don't deem immoral. Men and women aren't going to stop having sex and procreating because kids learn that gay people exist. I'm 100% confident that no amount of indoctrination would have caused me to stop liking girls. Moreover, same sex couples can legally marry everywhere in our country, so many of same sex relationships are not premarital. Admittedly, penguins and other animals can't marry so if they're having sexual relationships, that is obviously all happening outside the confines of marriage.

 

I have no reason to think our primate cousins will behave much better when they advance further. But thinking about it very long term, of course, the Earth itself is going to die of natural causes whether humans kill ourselves off first or not.

 

True, Planet of the Apes proves that. But in the interim the earth would be so much more beautiful.

 

What elementary school libraries stock those books? Do kids books on rape and incest even exist?