Let's start with - today, one of these has the words "felony" attached to it. The other does not.
What you’re suggesting is that unelected librarians have some sort of independent authority over deciding what books children should be exposed to that isn’t subject to review by elected officials. There’s an extremely short list of such roles in government—pretty much just government prosecutors and similar positions. Librarians, teachers, etc., are just employees hired to do what the elected government wants them to do.
Sorry, I should have been more clear. Desantis is banning books for political reasons that have nothing to do with the education of children.
> I think there needs to be a question of merit about what is taught, no?
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Experts on children's education are not calling for these politics-based book bannings.
I'm not arguing that Desantis is a bad politician. He understands how to create a boogeyman and then get people outraged over it better than any politician alive.
Well yeah, that's the whole point of their information machine.
>I look out at the political landscape and see that all the left is supporting this racist garbage, and I see the right is more concerned with oil pipelines and lowering taxes.
Who is now? The right only has the culture war to talk about. Tucker is on nightly raging about identity politics and whatever they want you to be upset about. I have two Democrat Senators and a Democrat rep I get emails from and they basically only talk about job creation, protecting the environment, and creating a fair tax system.
Your understanding of 'left' politics is just what right-wing media has told you it is.
Dude you're arguing with said he saw it happening at work and it concerned him. You pretended like that didn't happen. Why won't you acknowledge your fellow man's agency?
Where is this happening?
Education experts are delegated the authority to figure out the particulars of how to educate children. The decision of what kids learn is a political decision outside their domain.
Sorry, no. That's just "when I do it, it's good; but when they do it, it's evil." All these book decisions are for "political reasons," and they all have everything to do with the education of children.
Should be easy to show us some major examples on the left then. I can't think of a single governor moving the way Abbott and DeSantis are.
It is. How many books that are anathema to the left do you think you'd find in a school library (e.g. something skeptical about transgenderism)? If you look at library weeding criteria, you'll typically find language about removing books that are now politically incorrect (though they wouldn't use that term).
It's also a mistake to insist on exact symmetry. My understanding is the left is quite over-represented in the librarian profession as a whole, and "book ban" is misleadingly defined as overriding the choices of those public employees:
> It is important to recognize that books available in schools, whether in a school or classroom library, or as part of a curriculum, were selected by librarians and educators as part of the educational offerings to students. Book bans occur when those choices are overridden by school boards, administrators, teachers, or even politicians, on the basis of a particular book’s content (https://pen.org/report/banned-usa-growing-movement-to-censor...).
If a different situation were true (e.g. conservative Christians were quite over-represented in the librarian profession), I'm absolutely certain you'd see political responses from liberal government authorities.
> It is.
I notice you didn't actually supply a major example. Instead what you did was come up with a hypothetical that matched your rhetoric. Obviously that's easy for you, but you still didn't actually supply a major example. Usually an example would come from the real world and include a citation. Can you take another stab at it?
This is demonstrably not true by the fact that this is happening more against topics conservatives find distasteful or offensive (such as LGBT works), as per your own article. Look at that map and the subjects being banned.
So? Is it unreasonable? Do you really think you'd see a rousing fight from the left to defend books that discouraged or condemned gender transitions? Or would you see outrage and calls that "something must be done!" to protect kids from those ideas? Even the ACLU is backing off from defending people and ideas that offend their liberal supporters.
And the rest isn't conjecture.
You're missing my point completely, and misunderstanding how I was using the article I linked.
To put it really bluntly: a Democrat governor and a Republican governor are not going to respond identically to an abortion ban. Likewise, a Democrat governor isn't going to take any action to "ban books" if lower level government actors are already making book decisions according to his wishes. It would be unnecessary. Slot in a Republican governor into the same scenario, and he has to override those lower level government actors who are working in harmony with Democrat priorities.
It's foolish to look for or require total symmetry to see similarities. There are "book bans" coming from both ideological factions, they're just implemented differently.
It behooves you to show evidence that this is happening. So far you’re generalizing a fair bit while not citing, well, anything.
* Gov. Newsom banned remedial classes being taught at community colleges.
* Conversion Therapy has been banned and attempted to be banned by many states in particular in public schools.
* Bibles being banned by school districts.
This isn't a defense of Ron Desantis or any of those things. I'm not convinced Ron Desantis is the only governor that would ban books. If it's politically expedient to ban content, that's what happens in a democracy. I am not in favor of book bans but I very much doubt the defense of principles. The same people complaining about book bans would absolutely ban books if objectionable political content were being pushed on children from the other direction. Or alternatively what is the principled defense of things like the Dept. of Ed. promoting the discredited 1619 Project?
Conversion therapy is abuse.
> Gov. Newsom banned remedial classes being taught at community colleges.
You need to be more specific. Do you have a source?
This is exactly what a lot of supporters of Desantis would probably say about gender affirmation care for people with gender dysphoria. My point here is it just seems unlikely Desantis is the only governor that would ban books in schools. Conversion therapy is illegal in multiple states so putting those books in a student library would break the law so one might call that a ban. I would be shocked if you could convince me there is a governor who would always decline to sign bills that ban material from schools.
And? It's an ongoing debate that even I am unsure about and perhaps maybe they'll be vindicated one day. But conversion therapy is categorically abuse today. And for good reason.
>I would be shocked if you could convince me there is a governor who would always decline to sign bills that ban material from schools.
That's not really how it works. You need to provide evidence of Democrat governors banning books at the state level a la DeSantis and Abbott. I can't prove what they wouldn't do because the situation is theoretical.
This is all you wrote:
* Gov. Newsom banned remedial classes being taught at community colleges.
- not banned books and I explained the issues with your claim in another comment.
* Conversion Therapy has been banned and attempted to be banned by many states in particular in public schools.
- not about banned books
* Bibles being banned by school districts.
- I found one example of a technical battle in one school district in Texas which seems to be more about the larger message/battle over the written law in Texas. Besides this weird case I see no others. Do you have any sources or examples?
Aside from that one weird case I've found (which isn't a democrat or a governor banning books mind you it's a local matter over technicalities), I've seen no citations or specific claims of any kind.
There's a lot of states that have banned it besides that one. Do I care? no, not particularly. This is the Florida "book ban" law which is actually an "instructional material" ban. https://myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?F... Not a general book ban which would likely be unconstitutional.
The original objection raised here was that the governor is taking powers he doesn't have was it not? Specifics of one state's constitution aside, if a governor of one state can decide what is taught, why can't a governor of another?
As I said, banning material or requiring material is something both parties do or would do.
I also remembered there is a california school district that banned "To Kill a Mockingbird" recently for racism.
No one ever said that. This is not a discussion of gubernatorial powers. Just what is right/wrong.
Re: to kill a mocking bird you are mistaken. That was parents complaining and forcing the school to remove it from the curriculum. It is still available for students to check out. Not the governor, not removed from the school. Do I think it’s stupid and shortsighted? Absolutely. But it is not what we are talking about.
Where are these bible bans you were talking about?
Seems you also abandoned your claims about Newsom banning remedial classes given real context.
Frankly it feels like you’re just throwing a bunch of claims at the wall until something sticks, despite still having not proven basically anything you claimed is happening. A lot of “I heard that…” type stuff. The closest you’ve come are out of context, not as you described, or straight up irrelevant.
Either way this has gone on long enough. I’m done. Have a good one.
https://edsource.org/updates/newsom-signs-bill-to-ban-most-r....
For starters, remedial courses don't transfer to 4 year universities. Which seemed to be a serious impediment for students. Here are some other interesting tidbits:
>AB 1705 builds off a 2017 law, Assembly Bill 705, that said colleges can’t place students in remedial classes unless they are deemed highly unlikely to succeed in transfer-level coursework. That bill was brought forward amid research showing that students who took remedial math and English classes often got stuck in those classes and were less likely to finish their degrees.
>The latest bill goes further by limiting colleges to enrolling only certain populations of students in remedial classes, such as English learners and students in some career and technical education programs. It also leaves room for colleges to enroll other students in remedial classes if the colleges can prove, based on a student’s high school grades, that the student is more likely to earn a degree or certificate by starting in the pre-transfer classes.
Sounds like we should be applauding an attempted overhaul of community colleges in california to me.
As for Creationism? It absolutely should be taught in science class to help students distinguish between what is science and what is pseudoscience. You may as well make sure they understand what a scientific theory is while you're at it.
I'd throw in the Satanic Bible too as it actually defines what humanism is. That's useful info for anybody living in a modern democratic society not founded on a religion.
Throw in some Camus and Nietzche and these kids will have the knowledge they need to take on this world head first!
But, those kind of people don't make for docile laborers who are content to work to fulfill the dreams of others. So we make sure they don't have access to these kinds of books.
Everyone bans books. I am surprised this is such a meme because you probably won't find many supposed free speech activists also being in favor of putting Mein Kampf in the student library for the children or teachers teaching Creationist perspectives on science. I think there needs to be a question of merit about what is taught, no?