Conservative
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
view the rest of the comments
Why do Republicans insist on "protecting" children from stuff?
It's as if they think that if it's not publicly available, then kids won't have access to it. But so many parents are technically challenged and don't even use their parental filters on their home routers. Just because they can't protect their children with their own property does not give them the right to extend their façade of moral purity into the public sphere.
Also, what kids do you think are going to the libraries looking for this content? I, for one, would have never stumbled across any of these books. But if a person think they're kid would, then what do you hope to accomplish by removing this source of vicarious experience? We know damn sure they ain't coming to you as their parents to talk about their sexual orientation. The harm of removing sucks books is that the kids seek it elsewhere.
You can ban a book all you want, and you should be shamed to hell and back for even trying. But if the real intent is to "protect" children from stuff, then banning the book only ups the ante for acquiring the knowledge they seek. And that could quite literally kill them if they approach the wrong person or get involved with the wrong group in order to sate their curiosity.
So should school libraries just be completely unrestricted then? Anything and everything is on offer, because they might look elsewhere for that content?
Where the fuck are you browsing books my guy. I started pirating shit in middle school clicking on every "free download" link, and it never got even remotely that sketchy.
I would trust the discretion of the librarian to filter out books that are low quality or not appropriate. But if enough kids and parents request a book that book should be added to the library because ultimately the librarian/district works for the parents.
The call should be made at the local level, not by politicians who don’t even live in the district.