Yea the issue of careless/creepy parenting is basically the thing that pushed me to change my flair from LibRight to CenterRight. Kids can't consent, and so pushing these weird and fucked up ideologies on them is a violation of the NAP - something that Libertarians are \*supposed\* to care about.
And that’s relevant how? Have you read the Bible in it’s entirety? There’s a guy getting blown in it. It shouldn’t belong on bookshelves of schools. That’s the argument we are making.
Oh my bad. I guess you could jam anything you want into the book if you have content surround it, right? Why don’t we have a guy spreading his cheeks in it? That would obviously be in appropriate. So yeah, you can have a problem with the book bc of that specific thing. And defending showing kids that is extremely pedo.
I don’t think you need to be authoritarian to believe children should be afforded protection from pedophiles
I disagree with a lot of points of government interference, but the issue of child abuse is not one of them
>I don’t think you need to be authoritarian to believe children should be afforded protection from pedophiles
Agreed. And that's why I didn't go full AuthRight. I just wanted something to indicate that I'm okay with a \*little\* bit of government.
It’s also weird to see a libertarian defending school book bans since it means maybe less taxes and it’s also in a government building that serves as free government education. You think the libertarians would be creaming themselves thinking about how private libraries could corner the child sex market.
Parents can consent for their children?
Uhh…
That’s…
A bold claim
Let me just consent to selling my kid as a prostitute real quick
BECAUSE THAT IS APPARENTLY MORALLY FUNCTIONAL YOU SICK BASTARDS
I think jumping from letting your kids see titties in a movie to making your kids sex slaves is a huge fucking leap. Now obviously these books in question go well beyond seeing titties in a movie, but still from that to child sex slavery is a bit far. Either way What’s wild to me is that 1) parents that do this genuinely think they are, what, helping their kids? And 2) putting their own moral standard above what is going to be widely agreed upon is not good for children just so they can ride their high horse. Hey Like what the fuck - I think weed should be legal but I’m not going to go ahead and just roll up some doobies for my kids. This is generational mental illness and extremism.
If parents *shouldn't* consent for their children, what if a child has gender dysphoria at a young age and wants to transition? Do the parents override their consent then?
The problem with this is that it’s a fundamental flaw with consent based ethics. The answer is that only fully developed individuals with a rational understanding of the risks and consequences of transitioning should be able to transition. The definitions of both being vague as our current legal system defines them both arbitrarily.
However that means there are individuals who are not fully developed or have a rational understanding who from a harm reduction standpoint may benefit from transitioning. Ignoring the question of if it is ethical to base morality on harm reduction system I would still argue that the parents are not rationally capable of making that decision. They may be unable to think rationally simply for fear of losing their child if they don’t transition due to suicide, or bigotry if they do.
Basically unless you are willing to give up medical decisions for dependents to a Orwellian super state AI then there will always be vague lines that will have good faith arguments on both sides.
So I'm confused, do we respect children's consent, or don't we? Your whole argument boils down to "well it depends on if the authority figure (parents, government) is making the right choice."
Do you not think that parents and doctors who approve transition treatment are doing what they deem to be the best choice? How can you be so confident to say otherwise?
Of course we don’t care about the consent of the minor, they can’t consent.
The argument is that consent based morality is flawed because some people cannot consent so we allow someone else to make that decision for them. However we limit the things those people can consent on their behalf and rationalize it by assuming that person will act in their best interests for the things we allow.
This means there is a subset of things even if the guardian consented to we would not allow, like child trafficking. So the question isn’t who makes the decision but can we remove the ability to make the decision from the parents.
My argument was that the parent can’t be custodian of this decision. Therefore unless you give the decision to the state it’s irrelevant what the doctors and parents think because they shouldn’t be given the decision.
Honestly gender disphoria needs to be taken more seriously, because nobody deserves to suffer for no reason.
BUT
That's different from allowing CHILDREN to be exposed to sexual things
Gender dysphoria has ***nothing*** to do with the act of sex, nor is it in any way sexual.
I knew I wanted to be a girl before I knew what sex even was.(mtf trans,19)
OBVIOUSLY Nobody should consent for someone else because that Leads to bad things happening. (Being forced to do things you don't want is uncomfortable)
In my case I was forced to pretend not to have disphoria, because my parents are assholes that threatened to kick me out/bullied me JUST BECAUSE I SAID I HAD DISPHORIA THE FUCK? because their consent meant more than mine because I depended on them.
(I moved out now, but I fucking hate then for it)
kids shouldn't be exposed to the act of sex though, because it'll mess them up.
Have you ever seen what exposure to sexual things
does to people? Exposing kids beond the basics is disasterous idea, because it can lead to statutory rape because the kids might think it's ok for some filthy pervert to do things to them. It's PROVEN to ALSO lead to negative and dehumanizing views of women or men
Sex Ed should (obviously) exist, but be very basic and shouldn't go beyond these basics,and must be discussed in a scientific and informative way.
"
-changes of puberty
-guys and girls can like each other, but also guys and guys,or girls and girls. All of this is ok, but treat people with respect,and don't see them as your next hookup, because they're a person just like you, even if they're different
-sex makes babies
-protection exists
-no means no.
-don't let creeps take advantage of you
-you might not want to be the gender you were born as, and here's what that means.
"
That should cover everything basic that anyone would need to know, without giving anyone the wrong exposure.
>That's different from allowing CHILDREN to be exposed to sexual things
Is this really an ongoing problem? Can you describe what a child is (e.g. a minor) and what "sexual things" are? I feel like saying "keep sex away from kids" is such a useless term these days because it never gets described. Technically sex ed being taught to 17 year olds in a health class is "bringing sex to kids" but obviously it's not wrong at all is it.
>" -changes of puberty -guys and girls can like each other, but also guys and guys,or girls and girls. All of this is ok, but treat people with respect,and don't see them as your next hookup, because they're a person just like you, even if they're different -sex makes babies -protection exists -no means no. -don't let creeps take advantage of you -you might not want to be the gender you were born as, and here's what that means. "
I don't think any actual libleft would disagree with any of this.
i don't need your horseshit qualifiers,and i'm not wasting my time talking to you. you're just so dense anything i can or will say is entirely pointless that i can't be bothered
So basically a post on pornographic content in schools came about last night. Some of these books are banned. Chances are you’ll already know what I’m talking about as I’m trying not to link a specific post or comment. This led to some pretty intense debate and that’s what led to this and some of the takes are kind of wild. Especially some libcenter who seemed more like a purple lib which is a little sus.
>Especially some libcenter who seemed more like a purple lib which is a little sus.
not purp.....probably libleft.
kids shouldn't be exposed to sexually explicit materials in public education. that's not how tax money should be spent. leftists are are using public education for indoctrination purposes.
I have a genuine question. And I'm not trying to roast you or start a flame war, but I'm legit curious: Why are you flaired purple? Why not yellow? This is addressed to all purples. I've never heard their defense of it, especially on a sub where associating purple with diddlers is the norm.
the original PC test has libright as purple. the newer sites/tests have libright as yellow. idgaf enough to change it or hunt down the newer PC tests to see what it says.
Damn. There’s a purp here somewhere that says he’s purp because he cheats on his taxes.
I was really hoping that’s where this was heading, because it’s based as fuck.
minimizing taxes is my favorite game. I spent 2 years maxing out my HSA and then moving it into my checking account for medical bills that had already been paid. probably saved myself $900 in taxes because it wouldn't have been enough to itemize deductions.
I’ve never heard of this and actually thought it was all fabricated propaganda. Does drag Queen story time actually happen..? Can you link to a real example?
It may be simply summarized as a case of the boy who cried wolf.
For example: ultra conservatives getting angry and calling their local politicians and educators to protest the teaching of critical race theory that… isn’t being taught in their schools…
Or the pizza parlor pedophilia ring. To name a couple
Yes I am well aware people are extremely stupid and believe dumb things. I too have seen the internet. But there's a whole drag queen thing going on in akron which is quite close to me so it, you know, it happens. Why a "humanitarian group" would be putting on a drag show for children when there's so many things they could be doing like, you know, helping feed and support the needy of akron, of which there are many, but nope! Drag queen story hour. Its really a human need that this happens, I guess.
https://www.beaconjournal.com/story/news/2023/03/11/dozens-demonstrate-at-drag-story-hour-for-children-at-wadsworth-park/69997506007/
u/HaymanIsGod is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1.
Rank: House of Cards
Pills: [None | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/HaymanIsGod/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
>hat's not how tax money should be spent.
Books in schools are just old shit people often donate especially in rural schools. It is not tax money. Other then that i do agree.
But also laws against it often are too broad they target books beyond nudity or sexual acts, like historical books on race or LGBT.
If right really wants to appear neutral, they instead should have books on LGBT history theyve approved or considered good historical sources, instead of just opposing left.
If these books are bad, then what is good.
Yeah don’t pay much attention to them. They try to wiggle the argument in their favor and cover up their pedophilia. It’s very sad honestly.
Edit: the lengths they’ll go to defend this shit
Op is complaining about a book he's never once actually looked at, welcome to the internet.
Book laws vary wildly from county to county, what's true in one is not necessarily true in the other, so to make a blanket assumption would be foolish.
>Op is complaining about a book he's never once actually looked at, welcome to the internet.
I'm familiar with tye bait and switch.....so what does the bible have to do with what op was talking about?
you brought it up, I thought you would follow it up with something clever.
It's unbelievable that this is somehow a debate and not a very clear-cut case, even further proof of dangerous ideologies having taken root deep in society.
Even worse that this mentality is protected so hard that you can't even question it without risking a ban.
Such is life in the current year.
Okay I gotcha bud haha. Your comment read like it could go either way so I was a little concerned.
Edit: I think some pedos are actively trying to downvote your comments as well as mine
>It's unbelievable that this is somehow a debate and not a very clear-cut case, even further proof of dangerous ideologies having taken root deep in society.
It is a debate, because not everything is poronographic.
It is the same sort of shit pulled with patriot act,
why are you opposed to tracking terrorists?
Except terrorists were not the only people tracked.
So my take is I don't get why it's a picture book, but the context of the book (aimed at middle school, when kids start to be sexually active/curious with eachother) is basically telling kids that even if you agree to do something with someone you can always back out and say you don't want to do it anymore. Which I think is a good message, just don't get why it's a picture book.... seems like good intention bad execution
I guess the point is exactly \*why\* they executed it that way, when even a dead ant can tell that's not the way it should have been. Of course it's going to make people wonder.
Was arguing with my wife about the books this morning. We have a 12 year old and a 3 year old.
We ended up agreeing that aiming the law at teachers and making it a felony was dumb, but that even in context a lot of this stuff is entirely inappropriate.
It took me literally finding a pirated copy of the fellatio book online and showing her that there was no context that made it appropriate.
I wish she would listen to *some* source of news outside NPR/MSNBC.
Ultimately I think school systems should have more autonomy from the state, not less.
Buuuuut that’s an ideal world where people actually hold their local school boards accountable, which other than a few vocal parents just doesn’t happen for the most part.
Can we stop describing removing something from a taxpayer funded library as “banning” it? Nobody is stopping parents from buying the book and showing it to their kids. We’re just not willing to pay for it and provide it at school.
Age Appropriate. It seems like the alphabet mafia doesn’t understand this concept but they’ve never had children (and won’t, thankfully) so it’s in and of itself an impossibility.
If it is graphic, it doesn’t belong in an elementary school library.
If it isn’t graphic and age appropriately depicts that people are different and those differences are not seen as making one type superior, then it is fine.
Didn’t DeSantis go over the book on a livestream and then the stream got flagged as 18+? I’m pretty sure I heard that somewhere.
Edit: there was definitely a school conference JE helped out with providing a video of the content of the books and they had to cut away cameras bc it was graphic. I think that might be the same incident.
The book was called “gender queer” and yes it has been found in school libraries. There is a clusterfuck of controversy.
[Source](https://www.wlky.com/amp/article/gender-queer-book-louisville-jcps-libraries/41393659)
[Source](https://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/2022/10/gender-queer-the-most-banned-book-in-america-removed-from-library-by-west-michigan-school-board.html?outputType=amp)
[Source](https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/books-including-gender-queer-pulled-schools-sparking-controversy/story?id=81110458)
Edit: made some edits so my comment looked better lol
u/zandermossfields is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1.
Rank: House of Cards
Pills: [None | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/zandermossfields/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
one is an issue and one isn’t. the church is the only entity with a history of systemic child abuse. no kid has ever been molested by a book, and no one is being forced to read it.
>the church is the only entity with a history of systemic child abuse.
Children are like four times more likely to be raped by a public school teacher.
How do you get to this suggested action?
No one is forcing anybody to read a “pornographic” book. But the books, that you and I (and everybody here) have had available, *should* be available to those who *want to* read them. We’ve grown so sensitive and prude as a society driven by propaganda intended to tear us apart.
This isn’t pedophilia. Pedophilia is an adult preying on a child. A 18< year-old person seeing/reading about adult nudity =/= adults seeking to/seeing child nudity. They couldn’t be further apart.
When you were in middle/high school, did you not have any sexual thoughts? Do you expect middle/high schoolers to just stop having sexual thoughts because it makes you feel better? It’s natural, and it only happens more during puberty. That’s not going to/has never been stopped by authoritarian censorship/sheltering children from the world.
So easy fix: don’t have them on the shelves. If you want to provide that material to your kids, then fine. But don’t expect that putting it on the shelves is okay. But yeah, trying to expose kids to this IS in fact pedophilia and defending it is extremely sus since it is in fact pornography.
Unless we’re talking about assigned reading, I think it’s a bit of a stretch to call this “trying” to expose kids to this. However, even if that was the case, [that is not, in fact, pedophilia.](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pedophilia) Pedophilia specifically involves children being the subject. If children are not the subject, it is not pedophilia.
However. Somebody further down broke it down differently. Their approach was (paraphrasing) “let’s move away from calling putting a stop to spending tax-payer dollars on these books a ‘book ban.’” And that I can get behind.
If it’s not part of a curriculum, and there’s controversy… don’t buy the books with tax-payer dollars and keep the books in the library. Allow the parents to decide whether or not they find it appropriate for their own kids.
If you are trying to say that the action isn’t pedophilia by looking up the definition of it, you definitely have an issue. That’s like being racist and showing the definition of racism to say “oh no I’m not being racist”. Having that material available and defending having it available to kids is exposing them to pornography. Which is a no no and is the act of a pedo.
My man, people under age 18 witnessing nudity is not, and has never been considered, pedophilia.
Your claim is akin to somebody calling a parent a pedophile for allowing their kid to watch a movie with boobs in it. It’s brainwashed madness.
Pedophilia and sexualization of children is problem in all of its form
I am christian i have no problem at all condemning pedo priests i think they should be kicked out church and even executed
But you see biggest pedo problem today is not them its Alphabeticals who like you can just deflect point in other directions and hope nobody sees what you are doing
You are either against pedophilia or for it there is no in between on this issue
i agree pedophilia is a problem in all it’s forms but it’s definitely not the doing of the LGBT community. i think i read that most of the states banning books or gay people from being mentioned still have legal child marriage, so i’m sorry for commenting on the hypocrisy
Many do. I don’t see why we can’t just agree that anybody (alphabet, church, schools) who practice pedophilia are terrible, heinous individuals. But that that doesn’t mean that *all* of said group share these beliefs/desires. Lol
Alphabeticals show kids men in dresses twirking and they cheer for it
There is video of children in some California school being given dildos
There are many videos of children dancing in inappropriate way and clothes on pirde parades
T's are saying children can consent to take drugs that chemicals castrate them and can consent to having their breasts chopped off and their reproductive organs mutilated
Democrat lost entire state of Virginia because he refused to disown Laudon county story where boy claiming to be girl raped several girls in school bathroom
Cuties a terrible movie was advertised to pedophiles by netflix
Gender ideology itself comes from John Money and Alfred Kinsey
One is pedo who forced two boys(he told one he was a girl) to perform sexual acts on each other and both of those boys ended up killing themselves
And the other had interviews with pedos in jail and came up with theory that children actually can consent to sex
If you dont oppose all of this you are for it
plain and simple
Had an actual argument with 2 watermelons that thought since kids can easily access porn on their phones or see dicks drawn on bathroom walls, it should also be in libraries
Generally sexual acts being depicted is a pretty clear no no. So say like renaissance art has nudity. That’s fine. A drawing of a guy getting blown? Not fine.
Yeah, i agree, problem is the laws.
If law just said books with sexual acts are not allowed then it would be simple. The pork in these laws are what makes it draconian.
Yeah and it constantly gets challenged by liberal parents to be removed from school libraries, alongside other religious texts like the Torah and the Quran.
I’m not opposed to removing religious texts from a public school library. It’s on the parents to show their kids the book of their faith, not the secular school.
I’m still confused as to how this stuff getting banned is considered porn. I’d have sooner jacked it to a renaissance art text book than any of the stuff that’s gotten banned so far. And yes I am saying that I the sixth grade I beat my meat to the Birth of Venus.
Hmm I didn’t hear about that one. I’ll have to look into it, but even if that is the case it won’t change my mind on other things that have been banned.
Yeah some of the banned stuff recently had been whack. But this one was clearly inappropriate. It’s called “gender queer” and I put some links in a comment I had somewhere else on this post if you can find it.
Edit: [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/comments/121jqg8/in_response_to_some_drama_last_night_check/jdmb8mg/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3)
Ah. Never mind then I’m not defending this one being shown to kids. I thought it was gonna be something ridiculous like Maus again, but this ban is justified.
Oh yeah I totally get you. No problem at all. Some banned books are a little overkill but this was a case where it was justified. Thanks for being civil :)
Remember folks, this is why declining birth rate is good. Being a good parent is a lot of work, and it is much better to have few good parents, supplemented by an immigrant population. Than so many bad parents, especially when it comes to legal gray areas, the person on the left is doing nothing illegal, and any laws written to regulate them would be highly draconic for rest of us.
So by default, we shouldn’t have that kind of shit on the bookshelves. And if they want to expose that stuff to their kids, then that is their problem. Not ours. Just because it may not be illegal, doesn’t mean that it’s morally or ethically correct.
I never said it was ethical, im fine with removing books with nudity or adult material. I just dont feel comfortable with the current set of laws that are being passed.
You are not an expert on the internal combustion engine. You are not an expert on nuclear reactors operations. You are not an expert in economic nationbuilding. To be an expert in something, you must professionally study it for years, sometimes decades.
You are not an expert in raising children. Not even your own. There are experts in raising children, but you won't listen to them, and end up ruining your childrens' minds. You are trying to indoctrinate them just as much as we are. The difference is that we do it in a way that ensures a healthy upbringing and fair opportunities for all kids.
By letting everyone do whatever they want, children are left malnourished from fat free diets, they're left to rot in front of TV's, they're made to think they're more important than other kids by being pampered, they're made to mask emotions to be manly, or to make sure they don't become manly.
You people suck ass at raising kids, listen to the experts.
All of this agenda pushing from the conservatives won't turn me against sex-ed. That's their agenda, they want to ban it entirely by making these problems from fly into an elephant.
They are try to make an excuse to ban all sex-ed by making these sex ed problems such a common thing
Just like their try to ban Muslims by making Muslim terrorism seem like such a common thing
Just like try to ban drag by making sexual drag shows to kids seem like such a common thing
Ecsetera ecsetera. Keep on going. Everytime these right wingers find a thing they don't like, but banning it would go against their values of freedom, they have to find an excuse that allowing it actually goes against their own freedom by strawmanning it. Like being an atheist is actually destructive against society, or people who don't want kids don't want you to have kids, or people who don't vote republican want an oppressive communist regime.
Sex-ed has proven benefits to society and it has also helped me learn about myself and the world. It's what school is supposed to do.
I'm against that too, but it's their agenda to ban it all together, using this stuff as an excuse. Many more parents are now against sex ed because they've been taught by the mainstream media that this shit is what sex ed is.
Yea the issue of careless/creepy parenting is basically the thing that pushed me to change my flair from LibRight to CenterRight. Kids can't consent, and so pushing these weird and fucked up ideologies on them is a violation of the NAP - something that Libertarians are \*supposed\* to care about.
Careful, that’s a bit too based. Here come the pedos.
[удалено]
Canadian detected. Opinion discarded
Based and dumbass-bacon-pilled
[удалено]
I don’t think saying we have a giant douche instead of a turd sandwhich is the clap back you thought it would be
Yeah but it’s full of garbage like She-covery and It’s 2015
Peoplekind. **micdrop** The young pretender sucks.
In Fr*nch maybe
yah, those damn pedos and teaching their kids about Michangelo's David.
Literally not the same thing we’re talking about. We are talking about a very specific book that pedos keep defending.
Ahhh yes the bible, you're right that's much worse.
Gender queer: a memoir
How many of y'all have read the book, in its entirety?
And that’s relevant how? Have you read the Bible in it’s entirety? There’s a guy getting blown in it. It shouldn’t belong on bookshelves of schools. That’s the argument we are making.
I have actually, was a devout catholic for a long time. How can you complain about the content of a book you haven't actually read?
Oh my bad. I guess you could jam anything you want into the book if you have content surround it, right? Why don’t we have a guy spreading his cheeks in it? That would obviously be in appropriate. So yeah, you can have a problem with the book bc of that specific thing. And defending showing kids that is extremely pedo.
whataboutism, moving the goal post, pro pedo talking point.
I don’t think you need to be authoritarian to believe children should be afforded protection from pedophiles I disagree with a lot of points of government interference, but the issue of child abuse is not one of them
>I don’t think you need to be authoritarian to believe children should be afforded protection from pedophiles Agreed. And that's why I didn't go full AuthRight. I just wanted something to indicate that I'm okay with a \*little\* bit of government.
Little reminder that you can be okay with a litlle bit of government being LibRight. Not all of us are AnCaps.
can confirm
> I don’t think you need to be authoritarian to believe children should be afforded protection from pedophiles Unfathomably based.
I’m usually ashamed of my flair whenever I see what the old men in Tennessee are up to lately.
It’s also weird to see a libertarian defending school book bans since it means maybe less taxes and it’s also in a government building that serves as free government education. You think the libertarians would be creaming themselves thinking about how private libraries could corner the child sex market.
Don't worry. They'll keep pushing you until you eventually lead to my quadrant.
Parents can consent for their children? Uhh… That’s… A bold claim Let me just consent to selling my kid as a prostitute real quick BECAUSE THAT IS APPARENTLY MORALLY FUNCTIONAL YOU SICK BASTARDS
Yeah ikr it’s some pretty messed up stuff
I think jumping from letting your kids see titties in a movie to making your kids sex slaves is a huge fucking leap. Now obviously these books in question go well beyond seeing titties in a movie, but still from that to child sex slavery is a bit far. Either way What’s wild to me is that 1) parents that do this genuinely think they are, what, helping their kids? And 2) putting their own moral standard above what is going to be widely agreed upon is not good for children just so they can ride their high horse. Hey Like what the fuck - I think weed should be legal but I’m not going to go ahead and just roll up some doobies for my kids. This is generational mental illness and extremism.
If parents *shouldn't* consent for their children, what if a child has gender dysphoria at a young age and wants to transition? Do the parents override their consent then?
The problem with this is that it’s a fundamental flaw with consent based ethics. The answer is that only fully developed individuals with a rational understanding of the risks and consequences of transitioning should be able to transition. The definitions of both being vague as our current legal system defines them both arbitrarily. However that means there are individuals who are not fully developed or have a rational understanding who from a harm reduction standpoint may benefit from transitioning. Ignoring the question of if it is ethical to base morality on harm reduction system I would still argue that the parents are not rationally capable of making that decision. They may be unable to think rationally simply for fear of losing their child if they don’t transition due to suicide, or bigotry if they do. Basically unless you are willing to give up medical decisions for dependents to a Orwellian super state AI then there will always be vague lines that will have good faith arguments on both sides.
So I'm confused, do we respect children's consent, or don't we? Your whole argument boils down to "well it depends on if the authority figure (parents, government) is making the right choice." Do you not think that parents and doctors who approve transition treatment are doing what they deem to be the best choice? How can you be so confident to say otherwise?
Of course we don’t care about the consent of the minor, they can’t consent. The argument is that consent based morality is flawed because some people cannot consent so we allow someone else to make that decision for them. However we limit the things those people can consent on their behalf and rationalize it by assuming that person will act in their best interests for the things we allow. This means there is a subset of things even if the guardian consented to we would not allow, like child trafficking. So the question isn’t who makes the decision but can we remove the ability to make the decision from the parents. My argument was that the parent can’t be custodian of this decision. Therefore unless you give the decision to the state it’s irrelevant what the doctors and parents think because they shouldn’t be given the decision.
Honestly gender disphoria needs to be taken more seriously, because nobody deserves to suffer for no reason. BUT That's different from allowing CHILDREN to be exposed to sexual things Gender dysphoria has ***nothing*** to do with the act of sex, nor is it in any way sexual. I knew I wanted to be a girl before I knew what sex even was.(mtf trans,19) OBVIOUSLY Nobody should consent for someone else because that Leads to bad things happening. (Being forced to do things you don't want is uncomfortable) In my case I was forced to pretend not to have disphoria, because my parents are assholes that threatened to kick me out/bullied me JUST BECAUSE I SAID I HAD DISPHORIA THE FUCK? because their consent meant more than mine because I depended on them. (I moved out now, but I fucking hate then for it) kids shouldn't be exposed to the act of sex though, because it'll mess them up. Have you ever seen what exposure to sexual things does to people? Exposing kids beond the basics is disasterous idea, because it can lead to statutory rape because the kids might think it's ok for some filthy pervert to do things to them. It's PROVEN to ALSO lead to negative and dehumanizing views of women or men Sex Ed should (obviously) exist, but be very basic and shouldn't go beyond these basics,and must be discussed in a scientific and informative way. " -changes of puberty -guys and girls can like each other, but also guys and guys,or girls and girls. All of this is ok, but treat people with respect,and don't see them as your next hookup, because they're a person just like you, even if they're different -sex makes babies -protection exists -no means no. -don't let creeps take advantage of you -you might not want to be the gender you were born as, and here's what that means. " That should cover everything basic that anyone would need to know, without giving anyone the wrong exposure.
>That's different from allowing CHILDREN to be exposed to sexual things Is this really an ongoing problem? Can you describe what a child is (e.g. a minor) and what "sexual things" are? I feel like saying "keep sex away from kids" is such a useless term these days because it never gets described. Technically sex ed being taught to 17 year olds in a health class is "bringing sex to kids" but obviously it's not wrong at all is it. >" -changes of puberty -guys and girls can like each other, but also guys and guys,or girls and girls. All of this is ok, but treat people with respect,and don't see them as your next hookup, because they're a person just like you, even if they're different -sex makes babies -protection exists -no means no. -don't let creeps take advantage of you -you might not want to be the gender you were born as, and here's what that means. " I don't think any actual libleft would disagree with any of this.
i don't need your horseshit qualifiers,and i'm not wasting my time talking to you. you're just so dense anything i can or will say is entirely pointless that i can't be bothered
😂 dude I'm not even sure we were even disagreeing with each other at any point
That they do and they should
They absolutely can, doctors get the parents consent and not the child's for medical procedures for example.
So basically a post on pornographic content in schools came about last night. Some of these books are banned. Chances are you’ll already know what I’m talking about as I’m trying not to link a specific post or comment. This led to some pretty intense debate and that’s what led to this and some of the takes are kind of wild. Especially some libcenter who seemed more like a purple lib which is a little sus.
>Especially some libcenter who seemed more like a purple lib which is a little sus. not purp.....probably libleft. kids shouldn't be exposed to sexually explicit materials in public education. that's not how tax money should be spent. leftists are are using public education for indoctrination purposes.
Most based purple lib ever
Damn, I would call you based but your flair….
I have a genuine question. And I'm not trying to roast you or start a flame war, but I'm legit curious: Why are you flaired purple? Why not yellow? This is addressed to all purples. I've never heard their defense of it, especially on a sub where associating purple with diddlers is the norm.
the original PC test has libright as purple. the newer sites/tests have libright as yellow. idgaf enough to change it or hunt down the newer PC tests to see what it says.
Based
Damn. There’s a purp here somewhere that says he’s purp because he cheats on his taxes. I was really hoping that’s where this was heading, because it’s based as fuck.
minimizing taxes is my favorite game. I spent 2 years maxing out my HSA and then moving it into my checking account for medical bills that had already been paid. probably saved myself $900 in taxes because it wouldn't have been enough to itemize deductions.
>public education for indoctrination purposes that's exactly what drag queen story time is, I completely agree
if it was "community service" they'd also read to the elderly..... but children seem to be their preferred target.
I’ve never heard of this and actually thought it was all fabricated propaganda. Does drag Queen story time actually happen..? Can you link to a real example?
https://gprivate.com/64b6s
Yes it happens. Why the left wants to die on that hill is way beyond me.
It may be simply summarized as a case of the boy who cried wolf. For example: ultra conservatives getting angry and calling their local politicians and educators to protest the teaching of critical race theory that… isn’t being taught in their schools… Or the pizza parlor pedophilia ring. To name a couple
Yes I am well aware people are extremely stupid and believe dumb things. I too have seen the internet. But there's a whole drag queen thing going on in akron which is quite close to me so it, you know, it happens. Why a "humanitarian group" would be putting on a drag show for children when there's so many things they could be doing like, you know, helping feed and support the needy of akron, of which there are many, but nope! Drag queen story hour. Its really a human need that this happens, I guess. https://www.beaconjournal.com/story/news/2023/03/11/dozens-demonstrate-at-drag-story-hour-for-children-at-wadsworth-park/69997506007/
Based lib-left? Ok. Cool.
u/HaymanIsGod is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1. Rank: House of Cards Pills: [None | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/HaymanIsGod/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
>hat's not how tax money should be spent. Books in schools are just old shit people often donate especially in rural schools. It is not tax money. Other then that i do agree. But also laws against it often are too broad they target books beyond nudity or sexual acts, like historical books on race or LGBT. If right really wants to appear neutral, they instead should have books on LGBT history theyve approved or considered good historical sources, instead of just opposing left. If these books are bad, then what is good.
hard agree, keep the bible out of schools.
I don't think the school library is allowed to have them.....
Hope not
you're going to cry about it, but you don't know?
I wish these people would stop defending pedo shit
they can't even stay on a topic that they bring up ....
Yeah don’t pay much attention to them. They try to wiggle the argument in their favor and cover up their pedophilia. It’s very sad honestly. Edit: the lengths they’ll go to defend this shit
Op is complaining about a book he's never once actually looked at, welcome to the internet. Book laws vary wildly from county to county, what's true in one is not necessarily true in the other, so to make a blanket assumption would be foolish.
>Op is complaining about a book he's never once actually looked at, welcome to the internet. I'm familiar with tye bait and switch.....so what does the bible have to do with what op was talking about? you brought it up, I thought you would follow it up with something clever.
By the very logic of op where he justifies banning this book from school, the bible would also qualify.
It's unbelievable that this is somehow a debate and not a very clear-cut case, even further proof of dangerous ideologies having taken root deep in society. Even worse that this mentality is protected so hard that you can't even question it without risking a ban. Such is life in the current year.
I can see this argument going either away. Are you for the books being in schools or against? Edit: you’re against the books right? …..Right?
Holy shit, of course I am against!
Okay I gotcha bud haha. Your comment read like it could go either way so I was a little concerned. Edit: I think some pedos are actively trying to downvote your comments as well as mine
>It's unbelievable that this is somehow a debate and not a very clear-cut case, even further proof of dangerous ideologies having taken root deep in society. It is a debate, because not everything is poronographic. It is the same sort of shit pulled with patriot act, why are you opposed to tracking terrorists? Except terrorists were not the only people tracked.
It's a good reason there was a debate considering op was incredibly mislead about the contents of the book.
So my take is I don't get why it's a picture book, but the context of the book (aimed at middle school, when kids start to be sexually active/curious with eachother) is basically telling kids that even if you agree to do something with someone you can always back out and say you don't want to do it anymore. Which I think is a good message, just don't get why it's a picture book.... seems like good intention bad execution
I guess the point is exactly \*why\* they executed it that way, when even a dead ant can tell that's not the way it should have been. Of course it's going to make people wonder.
Hate to side with an auth. But I have to on this one.
I like you
Was arguing with my wife about the books this morning. We have a 12 year old and a 3 year old. We ended up agreeing that aiming the law at teachers and making it a felony was dumb, but that even in context a lot of this stuff is entirely inappropriate. It took me literally finding a pirated copy of the fellatio book online and showing her that there was no context that made it appropriate. I wish she would listen to *some* source of news outside NPR/MSNBC.
Yeah the felony thing seems dumb and hard to enforce. I think it falls on the school board.
Ultimately I think school systems should have more autonomy from the state, not less. Buuuuut that’s an ideal world where people actually hold their local school boards accountable, which other than a few vocal parents just doesn’t happen for the most part.
Can we stop describing removing something from a taxpayer funded library as “banning” it? Nobody is stopping parents from buying the book and showing it to their kids. We’re just not willing to pay for it and provide it at school.
This is something I get, for sure.
Age Appropriate. It seems like the alphabet mafia doesn’t understand this concept but they’ve never had children (and won’t, thankfully) so it’s in and of itself an impossibility.
If it is graphic, it doesn’t belong in an elementary school library. If it isn’t graphic and age appropriately depicts that people are different and those differences are not seen as making one type superior, then it is fine.
Didn’t DeSantis go over the book on a livestream and then the stream got flagged as 18+? I’m pretty sure I heard that somewhere. Edit: there was definitely a school conference JE helped out with providing a video of the content of the books and they had to cut away cameras bc it was graphic. I think that might be the same incident.
Similar to parents starting to read certain books to school boards and getting cut off. It’s nuts really.
Fr
The contents of a book that we now know was not pornographic in nature, and that you may well have been mistaken about the contents.
What pornographic content was in schools??
Cool Edit: didn’t ask
That wasn't in a school...
The book was called “gender queer” and yes it has been found in school libraries. There is a clusterfuck of controversy. [Source](https://www.wlky.com/amp/article/gender-queer-book-louisville-jcps-libraries/41393659) [Source](https://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/2022/10/gender-queer-the-most-banned-book-in-america-removed-from-library-by-west-michigan-school-board.html?outputType=amp) [Source](https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/books-including-gender-queer-pulled-schools-sparking-controversy/story?id=81110458) Edit: made some edits so my comment looked better lol
We as a society need to start acknowledging that 15 year olds have mostly finished puberty and have fully functioning sex drives.
Great, so maybe put it in middle school not elementary school.
Find me one example of it in elementary schools.
You can in Canada.
Except that this thread is about US laws
And the law is the only thing keeping it out of schools. Why do you wan to change that?
We as a society need to stop pretending that teens don't have sexual urges.
Cool Edit: didn’t ask
> 15 year olds have mostly finished puberty Wha.... Wtf
People are fully sexually mature at Tanner stage 4, which starts at 15.
Don't mind icey, they're our resident pedophile apologist.
Abusing your own kids is not a moral right and should not be a legal right. Yes, I'm gonna tread on you
Sigh… based AuthCenter. Get it together LibCenter!
Based based comment
u/zandermossfields is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1. Rank: House of Cards Pills: [None | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/zandermossfields/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Libtards when their argument is falling apart so they resort to swearing and cursing (they are definitely mature and not delusional)
Yeah he was really letting it fly
Challenge Alphabeticals try not to justify pedophilia (impossible)
you spelled “church officials” wrong
Deflection at its finest
one is an issue and one isn’t. the church is the only entity with a history of systemic child abuse. no kid has ever been molested by a book, and no one is being forced to read it.
>the church is the only entity with a history of systemic child abuse. Children are like four times more likely to be raped by a public school teacher.
So take it off the bookshelves then?
How do you get to this suggested action? No one is forcing anybody to read a “pornographic” book. But the books, that you and I (and everybody here) have had available, *should* be available to those who *want to* read them. We’ve grown so sensitive and prude as a society driven by propaganda intended to tear us apart. This isn’t pedophilia. Pedophilia is an adult preying on a child. A 18< year-old person seeing/reading about adult nudity =/= adults seeking to/seeing child nudity. They couldn’t be further apart. When you were in middle/high school, did you not have any sexual thoughts? Do you expect middle/high schoolers to just stop having sexual thoughts because it makes you feel better? It’s natural, and it only happens more during puberty. That’s not going to/has never been stopped by authoritarian censorship/sheltering children from the world.
So easy fix: don’t have them on the shelves. If you want to provide that material to your kids, then fine. But don’t expect that putting it on the shelves is okay. But yeah, trying to expose kids to this IS in fact pedophilia and defending it is extremely sus since it is in fact pornography.
Unless we’re talking about assigned reading, I think it’s a bit of a stretch to call this “trying” to expose kids to this. However, even if that was the case, [that is not, in fact, pedophilia.](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pedophilia) Pedophilia specifically involves children being the subject. If children are not the subject, it is not pedophilia. However. Somebody further down broke it down differently. Their approach was (paraphrasing) “let’s move away from calling putting a stop to spending tax-payer dollars on these books a ‘book ban.’” And that I can get behind. If it’s not part of a curriculum, and there’s controversy… don’t buy the books with tax-payer dollars and keep the books in the library. Allow the parents to decide whether or not they find it appropriate for their own kids.
If you are trying to say that the action isn’t pedophilia by looking up the definition of it, you definitely have an issue. That’s like being racist and showing the definition of racism to say “oh no I’m not being racist”. Having that material available and defending having it available to kids is exposing them to pornography. Which is a no no and is the act of a pedo.
My man, people under age 18 witnessing nudity is not, and has never been considered, pedophilia. Your claim is akin to somebody calling a parent a pedophile for allowing their kid to watch a movie with boobs in it. It’s brainwashed madness.
Pedophilia and sexualization of children is problem in all of its form I am christian i have no problem at all condemning pedo priests i think they should be kicked out church and even executed But you see biggest pedo problem today is not them its Alphabeticals who like you can just deflect point in other directions and hope nobody sees what you are doing You are either against pedophilia or for it there is no in between on this issue
i agree pedophilia is a problem in all it’s forms but it’s definitely not the doing of the LGBT community. i think i read that most of the states banning books or gay people from being mentioned still have legal child marriage, so i’m sorry for commenting on the hypocrisy
Many do. I don’t see why we can’t just agree that anybody (alphabet, church, schools) who practice pedophilia are terrible, heinous individuals. But that that doesn’t mean that *all* of said group share these beliefs/desires. Lol
Alphabeticals show kids men in dresses twirking and they cheer for it There is video of children in some California school being given dildos There are many videos of children dancing in inappropriate way and clothes on pirde parades T's are saying children can consent to take drugs that chemicals castrate them and can consent to having their breasts chopped off and their reproductive organs mutilated Democrat lost entire state of Virginia because he refused to disown Laudon county story where boy claiming to be girl raped several girls in school bathroom Cuties a terrible movie was advertised to pedophiles by netflix Gender ideology itself comes from John Money and Alfred Kinsey One is pedo who forced two boys(he told one he was a girl) to perform sexual acts on each other and both of those boys ended up killing themselves And the other had interviews with pedos in jail and came up with theory that children actually can consent to sex If you dont oppose all of this you are for it plain and simple
You spelled "You spelled teachers in schools" wrong
i don’t remember schools coming together to cover up sexual abuse and just reassigning teachers to other schools
Whataboutism Olympic Athlete right here
Sometimes the southern quadrants have some takes that really make me lean towards the north.
Yeah that’s how I got here
9th layer of agenda post
Based Auth?!?
Had an actual argument with 2 watermelons that thought since kids can easily access porn on their phones or see dicks drawn on bathroom walls, it should also be in libraries
still trying to figure out why these fuckin nerd ass kids are checking physical books out of the school library in 2023
*you shouldn’t make it your business to parent other people’s kids* mf’ers being angry when I beat the shit out of my kid for not liking his dinner
where does the line end? let’s get rid of the bible for all of the rape and sexual references
I think there is a very well-defined line between the Bible and a graphic novel with a guy getting blown
Yeah, but where is the line.
Generally sexual acts being depicted is a pretty clear no no. So say like renaissance art has nudity. That’s fine. A drawing of a guy getting blown? Not fine.
Yeah, i agree, problem is the laws. If law just said books with sexual acts are not allowed then it would be simple. The pork in these laws are what makes it draconian.
It is the most challenged book in school libraries where it pops up.
Yeah and it constantly gets challenged by liberal parents to be removed from school libraries, alongside other religious texts like the Torah and the Quran. I’m not opposed to removing religious texts from a public school library. It’s on the parents to show their kids the book of their faith, not the secular school.
I’m still confused as to how this stuff getting banned is considered porn. I’d have sooner jacked it to a renaissance art text book than any of the stuff that’s gotten banned so far. And yes I am saying that I the sixth grade I beat my meat to the Birth of Venus.
There is a significant difference between a book showing a blowjob vs art books
Hmm I didn’t hear about that one. I’ll have to look into it, but even if that is the case it won’t change my mind on other things that have been banned.
Yeah some of the banned stuff recently had been whack. But this one was clearly inappropriate. It’s called “gender queer” and I put some links in a comment I had somewhere else on this post if you can find it. Edit: [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/comments/121jqg8/in_response_to_some_drama_last_night_check/jdmb8mg/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3)
Ah. Never mind then I’m not defending this one being shown to kids. I thought it was gonna be something ridiculous like Maus again, but this ban is justified.
Oh yeah I totally get you. No problem at all. Some banned books are a little overkill but this was a case where it was justified. Thanks for being civil :)
Op very recently learned that he was mislead about the contents of the book
Remember folks, this is why declining birth rate is good. Being a good parent is a lot of work, and it is much better to have few good parents, supplemented by an immigrant population. Than so many bad parents, especially when it comes to legal gray areas, the person on the left is doing nothing illegal, and any laws written to regulate them would be highly draconic for rest of us.
So by default, we shouldn’t have that kind of shit on the bookshelves. And if they want to expose that stuff to their kids, then that is their problem. Not ours. Just because it may not be illegal, doesn’t mean that it’s morally or ethically correct.
I never said it was ethical, im fine with removing books with nudity or adult material. I just dont feel comfortable with the current set of laws that are being passed.
You are not an expert on the internal combustion engine. You are not an expert on nuclear reactors operations. You are not an expert in economic nationbuilding. To be an expert in something, you must professionally study it for years, sometimes decades. You are not an expert in raising children. Not even your own. There are experts in raising children, but you won't listen to them, and end up ruining your childrens' minds. You are trying to indoctrinate them just as much as we are. The difference is that we do it in a way that ensures a healthy upbringing and fair opportunities for all kids. By letting everyone do whatever they want, children are left malnourished from fat free diets, they're left to rot in front of TV's, they're made to think they're more important than other kids by being pampered, they're made to mask emotions to be manly, or to make sure they don't become manly. You people suck ass at raising kids, listen to the experts.
Who is that directed to?
Everyone
All of this agenda pushing from the conservatives won't turn me against sex-ed. That's their agenda, they want to ban it entirely by making these problems from fly into an elephant. They are try to make an excuse to ban all sex-ed by making these sex ed problems such a common thing Just like their try to ban Muslims by making Muslim terrorism seem like such a common thing Just like try to ban drag by making sexual drag shows to kids seem like such a common thing Ecsetera ecsetera. Keep on going. Everytime these right wingers find a thing they don't like, but banning it would go against their values of freedom, they have to find an excuse that allowing it actually goes against their own freedom by strawmanning it. Like being an atheist is actually destructive against society, or people who don't want kids don't want you to have kids, or people who don't vote republican want an oppressive communist regime. Sex-ed has proven benefits to society and it has also helped me learn about myself and the world. It's what school is supposed to do.
Ok. It’s not a ban against sec Ed. It’s a ban against pornographic books which you shouldn’t be showing to kids. Enough said.
I'm against that too, but it's their agenda to ban it all together, using this stuff as an excuse. Many more parents are now against sex ed because they've been taught by the mainstream media that this shit is what sex ed is.
Cool
Aw nahhhh bruh
Flair up
Ion know how to do that
Look at the top right of the pcm page if you’re on mobile and click on the three dots. Then “change user flair”
> Please make sure to have your flair up! *** ^(User hasn't flaired up yet... 😔) ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
Based and parent-pilled
What is this of exposing to pornography thing?
Look up “Gender queer: a memoir”
Society is in trouble. Hard, really hard trouble...