The GOP War on Books

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(06-06-2024, 10:30 AM)pally Wrote: who gets to decide what is harmful?  We have seen by actions of many people throughout the country that simply including books that have gay themes or characters are enough to set them off.  We have seen commnunity boards threaten to close their libraries becasuse they dared to disply LGBTQ focused books.  Evangelical parents could protest because their are books favorable to Islam

Libraries are designed to cater to a variety of tastes, ages, beliefs, etc  The probelm too many of these proposed laws are so broadly written that might offend or be disagreed with is considered inappropriate

I think it is simple enough to keep all book displays G-rated.

I never said, nor does the section, anything about the LGBTQ community or religion.

Seems like common sense really.

[*pally*]

(06-06-2024, 02:13 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I think it is simple enough to keep all book displays G-rated.

I never said, nor does the section, anything about the LGBTQ community or religion.

Seems like common sense really.

Since when has common sense been considered in laws like this?  The law is so broadly written ANYTHING perceived to be "harmful to juveniles"  2 people of the same sex sharing a hug can be construed as "sexual content".  What about a book on Renaissance Art...lots of naked bodies in those?

Children cannot be protected against ever seeing things that might be disturbing to them.  If they pick up a book that may be deemed inappropriate for them BY THEIR PARENTS, then let Mom ad Dad be the book police.

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(06-06-2024, 02:24 PM)pally Wrote: Since when has common sense been considered in laws like this?  The law is so broadly written ANYTHING perceived to be "harmful to juveniles"  2 people of the same sex sharing a hug can be construed as "sexual content".  What about a book on Renaissance Art...lots of naked bodies in those?

Children cannot be protected against ever seeing things that might be disturbing to them.  If they pick up a book that may be deemed inappropriate for them BY THEIR PARENTS, then let Mom ad Dad be the book police.

It is common sense. Keep displays G-rated and all the books are still available. 

I am a huge fan of a semi-obscure TV series called LEXX. Iy has never been displayed to my knowledge, never promoted, and yet I can go to the counter and request it, or request it via OhioLink, and the DVD's arrives at the library for me to borrow.

The library is not trying to hide LEXX. They are not burning the DVD's, nor banning it.

They are displaying the more popular books, trying to expand minds keep people coming in, and draw in new readers.

LEXX is just a niche series that a small portion of the population wants to watch, so it never makes it to the displays.

[*pally*]

(06-06-2024, 02:39 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: It is common sense. Keep displays G-rated and all the books are still available. 

I am a huge fan of a semi-obscure TV series called LEXX. Iy has never been displayed to my knowledge, never promoted, and yet I can go to the counter and request it, or request it via OhioLink, and the DVD's arrives at the library for me to borrow.

The library is not trying to hide LEXX. They are not burning the DVD's, nor banning it.

They are displaying the more popular books, trying to expand minds keep people coming in, and draw in new readers.

LEXX is just a niche series that a small portion of the population wants to watch, so it never makes it to the displays.

you will still have subjective objections.

Is a book protraying 2 men hugging G-rated?  Is a book protraying the same cover with a man and woman G-rated?

Is a book titled "Goldie Dust: My Life as a Drag Queen" with cover photo of Goldie both as a male and female G-rated?

How about a book titled: "The History of Gay Men in the MIilitary"?

You may not find any of the objectionable...but I guarantee you that there will be a group of people who do.

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(06-06-2024, 03:01 PM)pally Wrote: you will still have subjective objections.

Is a book protraying 2 men hugging G-rated?  Is a book protraying the same cover with a man and woman G-rated?

Is a book titled "Goldie Dust: My Life as a Drag Queen" with cover photo of Goldie both as a male and female G-rated?

How about a book titled: "The History of Gay Men in the MIilitary"?

You may not find any of the objectionable...but I guarantee you that there will be a group of people who do.

I want a display of LEXX.

I don't get why the rest of the country is so against it.

I like how the goalposts have moved through this thread, not necessarily by you.

[Rotobeast]

I wonder where Huckleberry Finn falls in this argument ?

Sent from my SM-S515DL using Tapatalk

[*pally*]

(06-06-2024, 03:15 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I want a display of LEXX.

I don't get why the rest of the country is so against it.

I like how the goalposts have moved through this thread, not necessarily by you.

that is the problem with broadly written slippery slope written laws.  The goalposts are never truly set in the first place so the endzone is up to all sorts of interpretations

[GMDino]

(06-06-2024, 03:19 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: I wonder where Huckleberry Finn falls in this argument ?

Sent from my SM-S515DL using Tapatalk

Or the Bible.

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(06-06-2024, 03:19 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: I wonder where Huckleberry Finn falls in this argument ?

It's still in the library.

Just three pages shorter.

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(06-06-2024, 03:55 PM)pally Wrote: that is the problem with broadly written slippery slope written laws.  The goalposts are never truly set in the first place so the endzone is up to all sorts of interpretations

I agree it is poorly written.

But the claims of banning, burning , are nonsense.

I get the argument you are offering, but I pose another one.

Aren't the displays already regulated, and what are the standards, and same as you asked, who is regulating those standards. It is going on today, so what are they?

Not an attack, just saying the standards are currently a mess and need clarity. And agree, before you say it, that nonexistent language  cannot be replaced with sloppy language as a cure.

What would you propose, to ensure displays are fair to all. Not to exclude one side or the other, end ensure there is fair representation?

[NATI BENGALS]

(06-06-2024, 06:38 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I agree it is poorly written.

But the claims of banning, burning , are nonsense.

I get the argument you are offering, but I pose another one.

Aren't the displays already regulated, and what are the standards, and same as you asked, who is regulating those standards. It is going on today, so what are they?

Not an attack, just saying the standards are currently a mess and need clarity. And agree, before you say it, that nonexistent language  cannot be replaced with sloppy language as a cure.

What would you propose, to ensure displays are fair to all. Not to exclude one side or the other, end ensure there is fair representation?

We have a first amendment and “settled law” from the Supreme Court apparently with the “Miller Test” and determining what materials are considered obscene and therefore not protected by the first amendment.



I knew I didn’t like the GOP, but going towards the ways of China and North Korea, trying to police thought crimes, limiting our freedoms. Scary stuff, getting worse than I expected.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-06-2024, 08:14 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: We have a first amendment and “settled law” from the Supreme Court apparently with the “Miller Test” and determining what materials are considered obscene and therefore not protected by the first amendment.



I knew I didn’t like the GOP, but going towards the ways of China and North Korea, trying to police thought crimes, limiting our freedoms. Scary stuff, getting worse than I expected.

Extrapolating a bit there, aren't you? Adults are free to read whatever material they can get their hands on that suits their fancy, children on the other hand, are protected from lewd material that may cause undue influence upon their soft, unfinished minds.

[*pally*]

(06-06-2024, 06:38 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I agree it is poorly written.

But the claims of banning, burning , are nonsense.

I get the argument you are offering, but I pose another one.

Aren't the displays already regulated, and what are the standards, and same as you asked, who is regulating those standards. It is going on today, so what are they?

Not an attack, just saying the standards are currently a mess and need clarity. And agree, before you say it, that nonexistent language  cannot be replaced with sloppy language as a cure.

What would you propose, to ensure displays are fair to all. Not to exclude one side or the other, end ensure there is fair representation?

Laws like this are actually the antithesis of conservatism and Republicanism which has always advocated for small government, fewer regulations, keeping the government close to the people.  I don't want bureaucrats in Columbus decideing what my public library can carry or display.  

For the most part libraries do a pretty good job of keeping it balanced.  It is the overreaction of people that is the problem.  No one's kid will become gay because they see a book titile or a photo of a same sex couple. 

[KillerGoose]

Generally speaking, I am going to be against government legislation that "bans books" or many other pieces of media. I don't think it is up to the government to determine what a child can read/watch/play, but rather the parents. It's disappointing to know that there is a non-zero amount of people who support these types of ideas.

[NATI BENGALS]

(06-06-2024, 09:33 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Extrapolating a bit there, aren't you? Adults are free to read whatever material they can get their hands on that suits their fancy, children on the other hand, are protected from lewd material that may cause undue influence upon their soft, unfinished minds.

Oh I definitely am. Only because I never thought I’d have the political party that will buy guns for their kids writing laws trying to control what books are at the library. That is the type of authoritarian shit many are concerned about with the new MAGA GOP.

[NATI BENGALS]

Didn’t realize there were multiple battles being waged by the GOP in the war on books here in Ohio.

https://local12.com/news/local/ohio-bill-proposes-criminal-liability-teachers-librarians-pandering-obscenity-kids-children-library-school-education-felony-crime-educational-book-ban-banned-intellectual-freedom-house-bill-556-obscene-material-age-appropriate-cincinnati

I imagine dangling criminal liability above the heads of teachers and librarians for giving a kid a book will be great for the educational system in Ohio. Should be a real boon on the professions.

I’m guessing Kim jong un probably cosponsored this bill.

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(06-06-2024, 09:47 PM)pally Wrote: Laws like this are actually the antithesis of conservatism and Republicanism which has always advocated for small government, fewer regulations, keeping the government close to the people.  I don't want bureaucrats in Columbus decideing what my public library can carry or display.  

For the most part libraries do a pretty good job of keeping it balanced.  It is the overreaction of people that is the problem.  No one's kid will become gay because they see a book titile or a photo of a same sex couple. 

To be fair, just because some think they do a good job does not answer the question or put the issue to rest.

I think because there is no policy currently in stone is the issue. Of maybe the policy is so vague and poorly worded as well, it needs address?  idk

[*pally*]

(06-07-2024, 07:35 AM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: To be fair, just because some think they do a good job does not answer the question or put the issue to rest.

I think because there is no policy currently in stone is the issue. Of maybe the policy is so vague and poorly worded as well, it needs address?  idk

Policies are are local either to the individual library or library system. Exactl whre it should be. Let each community decide for itself

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(06-07-2024, 08:06 AM)pally Wrote: Policies are are local either to the individual library or library system.  Exactl whre it should be.  Let each community decide for itself

I would agree if each library were fully funded by the community, but that is not that case.

[*pally*]

(06-07-2024, 08:16 AM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I would agree if each library were fully funded by the community, but that is not that case.

then rewrite the law to make it specific otherwise millions will be spent on lawsuits when no one can decide what is ojectional or not.  But right now, as written, it is far too broad leaving for too much for interpretation.  If they can't be specidic, then the bill needs to fail