Texas Republicans beginning the process of book banning. Public library closed for "review"

compcons

Golden Member
Oct 22, 2004
1,987
801
136
To be fair, they are creating a new section to house books they deem to mature for "young Adult". Not quite a book banning.

But this is most definitely NOT one of those slippery slopes like banning extended magazines for guns that would eventually lead to a full-on weapons confiscation and imprisonment program by the government. Not at all like that.
 
Last edited:

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
30,092
17,145
136
To be fair, they are creating a new section to. Houseboats they deem to mature for "Toubg Adult". Not quite a book banning.

But this is most definitely NOT one of those slippery slopes like banning extended magazines for guns that would eventually lead to a full on weapons confiscation and imprisonment programs by the government. Not at all like that.
Explain to all of us why a book that contains the subject of race too mature for a 10 year old?

As for your slippery slope that has already happened in Texas where Republicans passed a bill that would ban speeches by Martin Luther King
Texas Republicans are ramming through legislation to remove teaching about MLK Jr. in public schools | Salon.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
11,685
6,123
136
The problem is who deems what is "inappropriate." I'd much rather my daughter read a book with LBGT characters than many christain books. My library system already puts all books dealing with evolution, anatomy, or atheism in the juvenile section, even ones written for 5 year olds. But they have nutty old testament stories and books with hidden racism in the with children books.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Franz316

compcons

Golden Member
Oct 22, 2004
1,987
801
136
Explain to all of us why a book that contains the subject of race too mature for a 10 year old?

As for your slippery slope that has already happened in Texas where Republicans passed a bill that would ban speeches by Martin Luther King
Texas Republicans are ramming through legislation to remove teaching about MLK Jr. in public schools | Salon.com
I think you missed my sarcasm through all of my typos.

I was focused on the "sex" part of the evaluation process more than the historical fuckhattery of slavery/racism/segregation though. A young adult should most certainly be able to comprehend systematic racism that magically ended in the 60's and is definitely not influencing what the assholes in Texas are doing today.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
10,494
2,196
136
Pretty easy to see how history can be repeated. I don't think they realize what they are doing, they only believe that they are right. I have a feeling we're about to enter into a lot of history repeating come the next year.

269786565_4794853933906956_6580120685838883367_n.jpg
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
5,705
6,026
136
There’s a bill before the Oklahoma state legislature that would allow a single individual to demand that a book be taken out of a school library, and if it isn’t removed immediately, the school librarian will be fired, not be allowed to work as a librarian for two years, and the person making the demand will get $10,000 a day until the book is removed.


Pandering to the wingnuts who support him. The gracious overlords in OK, those blessed by The Lord by being born in the top 1% of wealth, know that the masses would be MUCH happier if untroubled by information or facts. And far too many books do, indeed, contain information and facts.

So they’re pretty much modeling an assault on the first amendment on the recent Texas abortion law, exactly as everyone not a compete idiot expected them to do. In the True American Fashion, they’ve decided to outsource governmental oppression to a private, profit-motivated third party.

I’m sure this will end well.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
53,781
6,282
126
I've read two books this year targetted for banning by these white Christian nationalists, their selections say far more about them than they do the books themselves.
Others “merely had objections to any books that portray LGBTQ relationships and people as normal.”
Anything that might evoke empathy for non-white people? Problematic!
Anything that might imply being other-than-cishet is okay? Problematic!
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
19,811
6,518
136
I've read two books this year targetted for banning by these white Christian nationalists, their selections say far more about them than they do the books themselves.

Anything that might evoke empathy for non-white people? Problematic!
Anything that might imply being other-than-cishet is okay? Problematic!
I guess there won't be many John Irving or Tom Robbins books on their bookshelves then. Pity them.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
10,494
2,196
136
I just have to LOL. What else can you do?

Let them ban all the books they like, while living on their flat earth, and waiting along the Grassy Knoll for their dead presidents to show up. Sounds like a plan to me.
 

HurleyBird

Platinum Member
Apr 22, 2003
2,427
849
136
I don't trust Republicans to not ban books or trample over free speech rights in general (just look at the horrible, blatantly unconstitutional anti-BDS laws). With that being said, let's try a thought experiment:

Someone like Slow or BrandonBull comes in and makes a thread about a library in a liberal state "banning" older books that are deemed guilty of casual racism. You roll your eyes. "As usual, if I look into this it's just going to be more conservative hyperbole and hysteria." You click on the link and, as expected, and in bold right at the top of the article no less, find this:

A new “young adult plus” section will be added to the library once it reopens to separate content considered more mature from the existing young adult section.
At that point do you slap on the laughing reaction, disparage the OP for being such an easily misled fool, and beat him over the head that moving those books into a slightly different section is obviously not the same as thing banning them? Be honest now.

This is, in my opinion, the worst thing about this forum. There's so much forgiveness for the people on your own team, and so little for anyone who isn't. And even if neither this headline nor the fictional one is exactly true, there's still room for concern in either case. I think the issue is that, when the inaccurate reporting is on your side you think about that concern and forgive it. When it's against your side, it isn't something you consider at all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mikeymikec

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
68,687
4,602
126
You click on the link and, as expected, and in bold right at the top of the article no less, find this:

"A new “young adult plus” section will be added to the library once it reopens to separate content considered more mature from the existing young adult section.
I like your post. I have one criticism. Who can we trust to determine what is more mature and what isn't. It is in this that I think you will find the bigotry. Everyone imagines him or herself to know the truth about everything. I think that is why Socrates was the wisest man in the world. Naturally this does happen on the left and the right and here I think it is happening on the right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HurleyBird

HurleyBird

Platinum Member
Apr 22, 2003
2,427
849
136
I like your post. I have one criticism. Who can we trust to determine what is more mature and what isn't. It is in this that I think you will find the bigotry. Everyone imagines him or herself to know the truth about everything. I think that is why Socrates was the wisest man in the world. Naturally this does happen on the left and the right and here I think it is happening on the right.
No argument here. I might not have been as clear as I could have been, but when I wrote that "there's still room for concern in either case," that's precisely what I had in mind.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
10,345
6,989
146
I don't trust Republicans to not ban books or trample over free speech rights in general (just look at the horrible, blatantly unconstitutional anti-BDS laws). With that being said, let's try a thought experiment:

Someone like Slow or BrandonBull comes in and makes a thread about a library in a liberal state "banning" older books that are deemed guilty of casual racism. You roll your eyes. "As usual, if I look into this it's just going to be more conservative hyperbole and hysteria." You click on the link and, as expected, and in bold right at the top of the article no less, find this:



At that point do you slap on the laughing reaction, disparage the OP for being such an easily misled fool, and beat him over the head that moving those books into a slightly different section is obviously not the same as thing banning them? Be honest now.

This is, in my opinion, the worst thing about this forum. There's so much forgiveness for the people on your own team, and so little for anyone who isn't. And even if neither this headline nor the fictional one is exactly true, there's still room for concern in either case. I think the issue is that, when the inaccurate reporting is on your side you think about that concern and forgive it. When it's against your side, it isn't something you consider at all.
Then I would say it's an arbitrary distinction designed specifically to keep those books (and the information contained therein) away from certain groups of people; likely the people who most need to see it.
 

MtnMan

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2004
7,315
5,518
136
When dystopian science fiction becomes reality.
Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 Modern Dystopia Warnings

In the future, the job of firemen morphs from putting fires out to burning books. The story Fahrenheit 451 revolves around this issue of book burning, but there is a deeper meaning to the book. Bradbury is warning that the monopolizing effect of social media will transform generations to come into a society with no genuine connections, no distinctive thoughts, and excessive reliance on technology. This book was written in 1951, and today, the propositions are no longer fiction, but are becoming a reality. Connections between individuals are fading away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
11,685
6,123
136
There’s a bill before the Oklahoma state legislature that would allow a single individual to demand that a book be taken out of a school library, and if it isn’t removed immediately, the school librarian will be fired, not be allowed to work as a librarian for two years, and the person making the demand will get $10,000 a day until the book is removed.


Pandering to the wingnuts who support him. The gracious overlords in OK, those blessed by The Lord by being born in the top 1% of wealth, know that the masses would be MUCH happier if untroubled by information or facts. And far too many books do, indeed, contain information and facts.

So they’re pretty much modeling an assault on the first amendment on the recent Texas abortion law, exactly as everyone not a compete idiot expected them to do. In the True American Fashion, they’ve decided to outsource governmental oppression to a private, profit-motivated third party.

I’m sure this will end well.
I can't believe Norman has such a stupid senator, generally Norman is fairly liberal, for Oklahoma.
 
Last edited:

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
11,685
6,123
136
I don't trust Republicans to not ban books or trample over free speech rights in general (just look at the horrible, blatantly unconstitutional anti-BDS laws). With that being said, let's try a thought experiment:

Someone like Slow or BrandonBull comes in and makes a thread about a library in a liberal state "banning" older books that are deemed guilty of casual racism. You roll your eyes. "As usual, if I look into this it's just going to be more conservative hyperbole and hysteria." You click on the link and, as expected, and in bold right at the top of the article no less, find this:



At that point do you slap on the laughing reaction, disparage the OP for being such an easily misled fool, and beat him over the head that moving those books into a slightly different section is obviously not the same as thing banning them? Be honest now.

This is, in my opinion, the worst thing about this forum. There's so much forgiveness for the people on your own team, and so little for anyone who isn't. And even if neither this headline nor the fictional one is exactly true, there's still room for concern in either case. I think the issue is that, when the inaccurate reporting is on your side you think about that concern and forgive it. When it's against your side, it isn't something you consider at all.
The problem is they appear to be basing the inclusion into this sections on whether the book has LBGT themes or characters. If they want to be equal, they'd have to also place all straight themes or characters in the same section.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
35,066
14,160
146
The problem is they appear to be basing the inclusion into this sections on whether the book has LBGT themes or characters. If they want to be equal, they'd have to also place all straight themes or characters in the same section.
It's obviously about isolating those books the certain people groups feel threatened by. 🤔

Just the typical special treatment bs
 

uallas5

Golden Member
Jun 3, 2005
1,127
890
136
When dystopian science fiction becomes reality.

Fahrenheit 451 was/is one of my favorite books. One of my all-time favorites is Slaughterhouse 5, this is actually where the end of my username came from. I read both of these books in high school, but I seriously question if high school students in GOP areas would be able to do so if they had their way.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY