You must log in or register to comment.

kitchinsink t1_jcfd1iv wrote

Give me a goddamn break.

This is ridiculous. Get this book banning-esque shit out of NH. Clutch your pearls somewhere else.

Educators don't make enough money to deal with this garbage. It erodes the confidence in the school systems, which, if we're looking at Florida, seems to be the goal.

Also, while it's "only a framework" you KNOW that people will abuse the shit out of this to get what they want, and wear down already exhausted educators. That appears to be the point.

The real world exists, and your kids might learn about it. If you don't want your kid reading something figure out your shit. That's your problem. Quit wasting my tax dollars on this garbage.

Edit: Thanks for the gold.


_borT t1_jch4ps4 wrote

There is a concerted effort to demolish education in the country. An educated populace is a dangerous one, so we can’t have that.

Using your reference of Florida, that’s a case study and weird, fucked up Petri dish for what you get when you actively sabotage an already ailing education system.

But votes are what matter to these people, and we all know who the uneducated (and/or willfully ignorant) like to vote for.


AMC4x4 t1_jci1xdf wrote

I'm old enough to remember when Republicans were complaining about liberals and their "safe spaces."


DataTouch12 t1_jctuh8w wrote

Book bans means you can no longer actually get that book. You can still buy the book if you wish to teach your child such. What being voted on here is stricter regulations on what is and isn't allowed in a publicly funded space and education system.

1[b]Complaints shall provide a reasonably detailed description of the material that is alleged to be harmful to minors.

Honestly this reaction you have is pretty over the top, however I'm sorta not surprised by it.


kitchinsink t1_jcufgrh wrote

Conversely, you're taking the book you don't like away from everyone based on your personal opinions.

I don't see why some people can't just parent their children when they see objectionable content. That is how parenting works: you're supposed to prepare them for the real world, when they'll see things that hurt their feelings all the time that they can't just roll up and ban.

Additionally, there is already a process for this. Your duly elected school board will hear book ban requests.


DataTouch12 t1_je7kb6v wrote

No, I'm talking about purely based upon fact. These books are not banned, if they were you wouldn't be able to buy them, so if you still want to buy them and teach it to your child you totally can.

Two: Parents and in turn tax payers have every right to provide objections to teaching practices and lessons that they find objectionable. Welcome to the public system, I think the issue people freaking out about pulling these books from libraries is that we are seeing a demonstration of what happens when you have people who are normally not involved in political or heated subjects now getting involved because it directly affects something they love and care about.

Three: Honestly, if you can't read it in a town board meeting, or a school board meeting, it likely shouldn't be in libraries targeting middle schoolers and kindergarten


GhostDan t1_jcfe3cq wrote

Nope. They are actively trying to ban books, not just at the state level but locally. My local library had a article put in the vote this week that made it so the librarians no longer had the decision on what books to put out, it was up to committee.

Footloose and Idiocracy should be required watching for these people, although somehow I think it'd go right over their heads


skigirl180 t1_jcfzrmg wrote

This is crazy. What town? I was just elected as a library trustee and was asked about banning books at candidates night. My stance is not to ban books...unless it is the bible


Impriel t1_jcglnau wrote

Nice that's pretty metal for a librarian. Power to you


skigirl180 t1_jcgm4s9 wrote

I am a library trustee. Tho I wish I was a librarian. Such an amazing job! The trustees do get some say in stuff tho.

I grew up catholic and have read the Bible a few times. It is really not appropriate for children.

Also consider myself a removing catholic. It is a lifelong affliction I take day by day!!


Ok-Glass7272 t1_jchia7r wrote

>that's pretty metal

Too damn clever. Consider it stolen. ; )


beachTreeBunny t1_jcfsflv wrote

Hope the librarians quit. I have an MLS and I would. So much for live free. The people who are afraid to live free are trying to control the state. Glad I moved. It’s really gone downhill the past few years between the state and local legislators and the free staters. NH used to be a state where everyone had a vote but no more.


Noctuema t1_jcfxxvu wrote

My only fear would be that we’d have library closings instead of change. Libraries (as I’m sure you know as a MLS!) are so incredibly important in low income ESL areas of NH, and save homeless lives time and time again.


GhostDan t1_jcgeeua wrote

It's gotten nuts honestly. People are going to have to move away for more freedom from the facists.


P0Rt1ng4Duty t1_jcjctd4 wrote

Also, ''don't look up.''


Slade23703 t1_jckw5li wrote

No, Don't look up was about lefties selling out and doing adultery.

He could have continued to push the message but he sold out for money and lust.

And the kid Of President lived to rebuild America


paraplegic_T_Rex t1_jcfkv7x wrote

Typical extreme right wing tactics. They have to remove books like this, because educating children goes against everything they believe in.

They need an uneducated population to continue the insane path they are on.


petergriffin999 t1_jcicmqn wrote

Imagine being so bat shit crazy that you believe any of the garbage written in the message above.

"Educating children goes against everything they believe in".

If you honestly believe that, you are someone who should not be taken seriously.

They want porn out of school libraries. There have been tons of examples of concerned parents bringing it up in town meetings, that the school library at the elementary level has porn. Getting that out of the school libraries isn't the worst thing in the world.

If you want porn in the libraries for the 4th graders, say so in this thread.


paraplegic_T_Rex t1_jciq54r wrote

You’re a moron. There’s no porn in school libraries. It’s just the unique way you idiots define “porn” to mean anything that isn’t about heterosexual relationships.

Throw me some names of books in the school libraries that are “porn” and I’ll wait for you while you come up with nothing.


petergriffin999 t1_jcivh1x wrote


paraplegic_T_Rex t1_jcivqew wrote

I’m so happy you picked this example. So now sex education is “porn”? Ridiculously dumb example. Thank you for proving my point. I hope to god you don’t have children.


petergriffin999 t1_jciw0e8 wrote

The graphic page about the anus as an opening for tickling fun sounds like something that should not be in the school library.

But whatever man. If you're happy with your young kids with that, all the power to ya.


paraplegic_T_Rex t1_jciw7vz wrote

Kids are going to do it anyway. Might as well educate them and make them safe. We all know you wouldn’t let them get an abortion, so you better educate them on sex.


GhostDan t1_jeevyu7 wrote

Yes, let's not educate them about other options than intercourse, so we can have more teen pregnancies, which you'll deny abortions to, creating more welfare cases. Good job


besafenh t1_jciml6z wrote

Justice Potter Stewart defined pornography for the SCOTUS: “I know it when I see it.”

Full quote, showing the problematic nature:

“I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description, and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.”


UnfairAd7220 t1_jcj43pi wrote

Let them scream. They can't seemingly read. Comprehension seems to be too difficult, too.


galaxyWanderer t1_jcfp2xk wrote

I think we need to start talking like we'll give these Yahoo's what they want. /s

Remove obscene books? Ban the Bible as it has some pretty graphic pornographic sections. And don't get me started on whether the Son of Solomon is to a young boy or not.

The Bible has:

  • incest
  • paedophilia
  • polygamy

Virginity important to you? Let's have detailed lessons on how they confirm a woman is a virgin, along with training videos and detailed anatomical drawings.

Let's bring this up in every single hearing we can go to. This idiocy must stop and only we can do it.


Mogus0226 t1_jcg3zys wrote

Have T-shirts made up with "She lusted after her lovers whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses".

When people complain, tell them it's right out of the Bible.


AcolyteOfTheHand t1_jcg4a11 wrote

How did you miss the biggest one that kicked it all off? God impregnated a child. The deity they worship is at best a pedophile, and at worst a rapist. And the world wonders why child abuse is rampant in the church. Judas fucking christ.

I guess you didn't necessarily miss it, but I feel like it is worth mentioning directly.


smartest_kobold t1_jcg3bes wrote

Ezekiel 23:20 For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.


CBKritter t1_jchhl87 wrote

I'm kinda dumb so excuse my lack of knowledge, but what in the ever loving fuck is

> whose issue is like the issue of horses

Suppose to translate to?


the_nobodys t1_jchmqic wrote

I'm assuming from the post above, issue refers to ejaculate. Barf.


SheeEttin t1_jchxyyz wrote

Also "the flesh of asses" means they were hanging absolute donkey dong.


Solid_Information_66 t1_jcgjao3 wrote

When I was younger I took a Bible study course with some friends (as a way to hang out with them more, not because I actually believed in God or wanted more religious education).

I will never forget listening to one passage where these townspeople watched an Angel fall to earth and they hunted it down to this old man's property. The old man, wanting to protect the Angel, offered up his daughter to the townspeople, telling them they could basically use her for all their sexual gratification instead of the Angel. The townspeople passed on that offer and instead chose to repeatedly sodomize the Angel.

If you needed a more perfect example of the Chritians in their prime, that story was it right there.


besafenh t1_jcinlin wrote

God sends two angels to destroy Sodom. Lot welcomes them into his home, but all the men of the town surround the house and demand that he surrender the visitors that they may "know" them. Lot offers the mob his virgin daughters to "do to them as you please", but they refuse and threaten to do worse to Lot. The angels strike the crowd blind.

Genesis is also the root of the Mensch, the 10 righteous, saving the world from deserved destruction.


stonewallmike t1_jcfpq4v wrote

Song of Solomon is obviously not “to a young boy,” and 5 minutes reading it makes this patently clear… even in the Hebrew the pronouns are gendered, and the author talks about his beloved’s breasts.

So…get started, I guess?


besafenh t1_jcinsm9 wrote

Given the age of Bat Mitzvah, 13 year old girls?


skigirl180 t1_jcfze0i wrote

Dear Christians, stop being afraid of sex. Thank you for coming to me Ted talk.


besafenh t1_jcinwpv wrote

They’re fine with sex. Not so much with YOU having sex.


HaggisMcD t1_jcf7cdm wrote

You think these knobs watched Footloose?


draggar t1_jcfpba9 wrote

Two of the requirements or questions should be "Have you actually read this book?" and "Do you understand the book?"


UnfairAd7220 t1_jcj4b96 wrote

Did you read the bill? Did you understand the bill?


draggar t1_jcjrw8n wrote

Yep, and the relevant part (the parent / guardian has to reasonably explain what part and why it's offensive) is quite vague.

At least the bill states that the parent / guardian has to have a child enrolled in the school.

This bill will require, by law, a service to exist that has existed (or at least did when I went to school in the 80's and 90's).


Different_Ad7655 t1_jcfvuaa wrote

“Dort wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man auch am Ende Menschen.” (Heinrich Heine ) So prophetically stated in the Rhineland in 1822.. “where they burn books , eventually they will also burn people..“.


BelichicksBurner t1_jcfyii5 wrote

And the culture wars continue. Such a shame so many NH voters have no clue that these absurd culture things are literally debated by our state government on a near daily basis now. Such a waste of time.


CrotchetAndVomit t1_jcgm9rs wrote

"Life free or die except if it's something I don't explicitly approve of or agree with"

-The right side of the isle.


Serenla87 t1_jch0jk2 wrote

There is a group of people called We The People who have been coordinating to put folks in office that would keep pushing this agenda. It's been exhausting but NH folks have managed to defend state and local level seats against them. However a few have gotten through and they will keep trying this over and over until they're voted out.


BluestainSmoothcap t1_jchgpzi wrote

Banning books in the age of a globally accessible digital library. Who the fuck is in charge of this place?


Ok-Glass7272 t1_jchijrh wrote

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."


SanchitoQ t1_jciv4sg wrote

I like the Lord Helmet version.

“Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb”


MamaBearForestWitch t1_jchixs7 wrote

Throughout history, the ones banning books never end up being the "good guys"


Dependent_Season_669 t1_jchikvb wrote

As a NH educator, boy does this make my blood boil. I honestly just don't know what to say at this point!


TheMobyDicks OP t1_jcjz2kk wrote

Thanks for doing what you do. I'm a veteran who happened to serve in the Navy during Desert Storm. Got some spiffy ribbons and get thanked all the time even though Iraq has no Navy (i.e. I mopped up oil, changed cannon plugs and fraternized with Asian women). Point is, day to day, you guys are the heroes. I realize it, and respect it, every day when my kids come home from school. I'm so sorry that society makes it hard for those whom are really the foundations of our future. It's just fucking shameful.


Dependent_Season_669 t1_jcpw9vy wrote

You make a great point. Thank you for your service as well!! I love what I do (I teach kindergarten) but all the politics can get so tiring.


captainjackass28 t1_jci4h5f wrote

God karens should not be allowed access to the legal system.


P0Rt1ng4Duty t1_jcjd6is wrote

Absolutely not. Everybody needs access on the same level or the legal system means nothing.

What 'Karens' need is to realize that screaming your opinion does not make it a popular one. They're in the minority and it's up to us to prove it.


dfresh429 t1_jckkx0l wrote

Repubs just have to ask themselves this question - At any point in history, any movie, any story - when did the good guys ever ban books or restrict access to information. Can you think of ANY instance?



Syd1164 t1_jcifh8f wrote

Who ever authored this bill is a fucking Nazi!!! No room for bigots and nazis in NH. Move the fuck out.


Vagabond_Tea t1_jcoueje wrote

Originally from NH but living in FL now. And can confirm that the book banning is real and every teacher hates it.

I really hope enough people in NH speak out against this. Because in Florida, big money and seas of homophobic conservatives dominate down here.


Azr431 t1_jcfqwdl wrote

Ah yes, let's empower the bigots even more


RIPKellys t1_jd7txu5 wrote

What happened to Live Free or Die?


shibbin4libbin t1_jciptb7 wrote

In fairness tax payers fund the public education system. If they don’t want pornography in the classroom I don’t see why they can’t have a say.


hedafeda t1_jch2u6g wrote

This is actually a good bill. It just addresses the complaint process in a timely manner and says no educators can be arrested for having a questionable book that gets complaints from parents. The bill itself doesn’t ban books. Because NH is actually intelligent, unlike Floriduh.


Bobtom42 t1_jcfj746 wrote

I guess not, because I don't understand the reference. To be fair, I wasn't born yet.....


AcolyteOfTheHand t1_jcg4zob wrote

It is a musical about a town that bans dancing because the typically shitty christian minister is clutching pearls.

Thanks for not being a Karen like the below poster and insisting people don't use common cultural references just because you don't know them.


Bobtom42 t1_jcgfd2n wrote

That premise sounds so absurd...


AcolyteOfTheHand t1_jcgh856 wrote

And yet it is at least partially based on actual events that happened in Elmore City, Oklahoma in 1979.


John_th_Faptist t1_jch7p1s wrote

Oh no, there might be a hearing about things taught in school.....the fucking horror. They aren't banning anything. Only that if a parent has an issue with something in the curriculum that they have a hearing about it. Meaning if it's some crackpot bitching about sex ed, they will likely be shown the door after they are voted down. Now if they bring up a legitimate concern then perhaps it IS something to be looked at. Freedom means freedom to disagree with things, I feel that most of you have forgotten that, or never learned it to begin with.

So TLDR: calm your fucking tits


hedafeda t1_jchtqd9 wrote

Thank you. I don’t think this thread is understanding what this bill addresses. SMH.


petergriffin999 t1_jcicyee wrote

Most of the people in this thread also have no interest in knowing what the bill addresses. They just want to REEEEEEEEEE about the rEthUGliCaNS.


Crash_727 t1_jchcbzo wrote

So, for those opposing the idea of educating kids with "obscene" materials, who's gonna be the first to sign their kid up for a viewing of "Caligula" & "Debbie Does Dallas"?


besafenh t1_jciogi3 wrote

Sorry. I’m holding out for the Rocky Horror Picture Show.


TheGrateKhan t1_jcfai5m wrote

This bill doesnt do any banning or restricting. All it does is provide a framework for how education institutions are to respond to complaints about the materials taught or shown and what timeframes they have to act by. The schools dont have to agree with the complaints, they just have to have a hearing on it. The schools can absolutely disagree with the complainant and keep the material in the curriculum/ environment.

While this provides some pathway for parents to try and keep their children from being exposed to things like 50 shades of gray at schools or libraries; I fear that material more likely to be complained about are good books with harsh but important messages, like To Kill A Mockingbird or The Color Purple.

Fuck Catcher In the Rye though, that book can get banned.


Darwins_Dog t1_jcfgbc6 wrote

It provides a way for any parent to waste schools' time and resources by filing a bogus complaint and forcing the school to have a hearing. Spare us the pearl clutching about "they could read 50 shades of gray." That's about as real as students using litter boxes at school. Blatant unfounded fear mongering.

This bill is designed to hurt public education under the guise of parental rights.


TheGrateKhan t1_jcfhzst wrote

You might not have read my entire statement, and thats fine it was quite long. I follow up that 50 shades example (one i figured the world would recognize as something we dont want children to be exposed to) with what i actually fear will happen(good teachings being restricted). If it would make you feel better, imagine instead of 50 shades, I wrote something that you think shouldn't be taught or promoted in educational settings, depending on age group.


Darwins_Dog t1_jcfkvft wrote

Your post sounds like you think this bill is a good idea with some flaws. I hope I misread it, but your example of the possible upside is straight out of the fear mongering playbook. Hyperbole aside, what books are you worried about? Are there examples of schools in NH stocking inappropriate books? I haven't read anything, thus why I call it unfounded fear mongering.

If you find something objectionable in the school library, start with a conversation. We don't need a law to protect us from a made up scenario.


TheGrateKhan t1_jcfvwwq wrote

For the most part, I do think the bill is a good idea. I recognize the potential for abuse and misuse, which should be addressed to add potential penalties for clearly vexatious incidents.

But the bill provides a fairly clear pathway for both complainants and the defendants/institutions. The school, library, or other educational organization just has to address the concern within a timely manner. They can say " this is clearly bull, we're not doing anything about it." And if the complainant is unhappy, it provides them with the instructions on how to handle it further. If theres ever a situation in which an explicitly anti trans curriculum is added to a school, the parents or even the students themselves deserve to have an actual way to get recognition of their issue and some form of decision.

Personally, it doesnt matter to me what the particular item at issue is. If I was in a situation where I felt that a particular subject/topic/etc. should not be taught or disseminated in the manner or age group it was, I'd want there to be a set of rules that i can look to for how to get that issue addressed and know that i am at least guaranteed a response.

Example: if Andy Dufresne wrote 1 letter every day to get funding or books for the prison library, and the government was forced to respond to him, he might've gotten a proper resolution much faster had a bill similar to this been enacted. You shouldnt be forced to overwhelm an institution or organization just to get a response to your concerns.


Darwins_Dog t1_jcg8n0y wrote

You glossed over the part where a county attorney can decide the school has to defend their "this is bull" argument in court. It's an unnecessary burden that doesn't need to be there.

Obvious potential abuses should be fixed before passing a law, not after. They can submit a revised version and I'll reconsider my position, but I'm not going to pin my hopes on politicians doing the right thing after they have what they want.

Andy Dufrense was a fictional character. It's fitting that you would use him as an argument for who this law would help.


TheGrateKhan t1_jcgg1lr wrote

Didnt gloss over that part, its part of the complaint process. If the person who filed the complaint is dissatisfied with the 1st response, they can escalate the issue to the next person in line, that individual can determine whether a hearing in court is necessary. Alternatively, they can support the first response and agree that the complaint is unneeded.

The bill is still only in the House, so there is ample time for both politicians and citizens like you and I to make our concerns heard and have amendments made to ensure that this bill has all the grounds covered. It may get drastically changed in the senate.

I used Andy Dufresne as an example because it's again a situation i figured most people are familiar with because it was an incredibly popular piece of media. The CONCEPT which is the important part to focus on, is that in a world without these types of rules that require an answer be given and be given by a particular timeline from your government or educational systems, they can simply ignore you unless you flood them with complaints or publicity. You shouldnt have to resort to those measures to get something as simple as an answer and/or a direction to go if dissatisfied with the answer. Especially from a branch, portion, or individual in your government.

Ill try a different example:

A public school History teacher decides that for the beginning of the Ancient Civilizations portion, hes going to have the class read/study The Old Testament of The Bible and is teaching them that what happened in The Bible is Historically accurate. Or teaches the history of the Civil War and Reconstruction only from the perspective of the Confederacy and tries to malign principles of the Union? I can guarantee you that there's a group of people who would view these as Obscene and theyd have every right to complain. Youll probably say that the Separation of Church and State solves the first one, but if the school doesnt even need to address your complaint, how do you get the ball rolling? You'd have to file a lawsuit or contact a governmental body thats above than the school. This law looks to make that easier to do. It forces the institution to address that you have a concern, and if they dont do the correct thing, it'll open them up to larger amounts of trouble if they are actually in the wrong.


smartest_kobold t1_jcfpzu5 wrote

Being able to prosecute people for putting Heather Has Two Mommies in a high school library will have a chilling effect. Possibly more insidious than an outright ban.


TheGrateKhan t1_jcfx014 wrote

The prosecution is only if the defendant(s) is/are found to be in the wrong, and continues to perform actions that were ruled to be obscene after being notified that it is not allowed to continue. After being told that you cant take any more cookies from the jar, if you continue to take cookies from the jar, THEN the select government entities listed can prosecute.


smartest_kobold t1_jcg24iq wrote

Every teacher needs to check the local and state restrictions and bans list before they can bring a book inside a school? That's not a lot better.


GhostDan t1_jcfeaqx wrote

Local attempt started as "Oh no that book may not be appropriate for children" (It was borderline, and I'm big on parents actually parenting their children) then people started jumping in. One person actually said "Once this is done we can look for any race theory books" in a town hall.


devildogmillman t1_jcfisxg wrote

Wait whats wrong with Catcher in the Rye lol

Written by one of our own


Mynewadventures t1_jcfjyf3 wrote

I loved that book and I remember making my 13 year old Daughter read it.

I remember her saying, 'frankly Dad, it was boring. And I hated that kid".

My point was made that teenagers suck and are boring.


TheGrateKhan t1_jcfkgnw wrote

I just cant stand Holden. Hes a whiny baby and one of the most annoying narrators to follow. Every other description of someone is calling them a "phoney" for some usually unjustified reason. Hes obscenely cynical of the world and everyone else in it, to the point where hes not even fun to follow. You are almost rooting for bad things to happen to him because hes one of the few protagonists that ive felt earns his misfortune and unhappiness.

The only takeaway I got out of CITR was to try my hardest not to turn into Holden Caulfield. If that was Salingers goal, then ill backtrack and say its actually a decent book.

Also, in one of the early chapters, he uses his prep school mattress as a fleshlight, and i think thats just kinda gross lol.


devildogmillman t1_jcfsfql wrote

I mean yeah didnt like or finish the book when they assigned it to me in HS. It wasnt particularly offensive it just didnt grab me.


TheGrateKhan t1_jcfxmh1 wrote

Oh i dont think Catcher is offensive or not age appropriate, I just didnt enjoy the book. The part where I said it can get banned was meant as a joke to try and lighten the mood because these topics are often dry and adversarial.


devildogmillman t1_jcg9zpe wrote

No I just meant it doesnt personally offend my literary sensibility. But it is probably not a good book for high schoolers to read.


TheMobyDicks OP t1_jcg3j8c wrote

>he uses his prep school mattress as a fleshlight

That's some funny shit! Gracias.


lellololes t1_jcfjcr6 wrote

The reality is that the elementary school is... Not likely to have 50 shades of gray in the school library.

It is not unreasonable to have a policy about books that are appropriate and a policy about how to handle complaints, but at the same time those policies will be abused. I don't think there is a great way to deal with clashes like this so would tend to veer on the side of being more permissive rather than allowing more restrictions.

The framework would allow some towns to do things like banning cute books about penguins that are entirely age appropriate.

A lot of things working correctly are based on the notion of everyone involved acting in good faith, and when people do not, it wrecks the systems that might be set up. Most parents know that their children are exposed to things in public that they are not exposed to at home. Hiding a few books from them is not going to change the influences on their kids.

As soon as parents go in a direction that is basically "I don't want my kid exposed to this because it is against my religion" it reminds me of why we have separation of church and state. That's nice. Many books feature stories that clash with many religions. Do we go through all the books and make sure that everything would be appropriate for a strict adherent to Jainism too? Now that is truly "woke"...

Except that it isn't.

I can only hope that the people of this fine state can live and let live, but a significant proportion of the population wishes to have a culture war - and ironically those people are the ones that claim the mantle of freedom.


BelichicksBurner t1_jcg0944 wrote

> this provides some pathway for parents to try and keep their children from being exposed to things

Full stop. That's the entire problem: many parents who have been indoctrinated into extreme ideological factions (that number is much bigger than you think, on the left and the right) simply can't be trusted to know what their kids can and can't handle being exposed to. I literally listened to a fellow parent just last month complaining about their kid being exposed to "critical race theory"...because he had to read a 60-page book about Harriet Tubman. To me it was laughable...but I saw more than one parent nodding their head in agreement. Fact is some parents simply want to create an echo chamber for their children similar to the ones they've created for themselves. They can't be allowed more power to do that. Look at the clown who tried to get a teacher fired because the teacher dressed too feminine. You wanna give THAT shitbag more power over what's taught in our schools? No thanks.


futureygoodness t1_jcfh8r5 wrote

It’s not a ban or restricting, just imposes bureaucratic processes that waste people’s time


gmcgath t1_jcfjpj1 wrote

I have no idea what Footloose is or was, and I have no motivation to research it just to figure out what your point is there. But thanks for linking to the bill itself. Neither upvoting nor downvoting.

Figuring out what a bill like this says is complicated, with its negations of negations (typical of bills changing existing RSAs). As I read it, it would remove a protection from schools below the higher-education level, subjecting them more easily to obscenity charges. Given the current atmosphere of gratuitous obscenity claims, it's a bad bill.

Please, next time, don't assume people know all your cultural references.


Hereforthemadness1 t1_jcfqy8c wrote

2 things: 1: In the time it took you to type this Karen rant out which literally says just, nothing, you could have googled “footloose” and gotten all the info you needed to understand this cultural reference. 2: The fact someone used a cultural reference you didn’t get offended you so much you had to type out a bitchy rant about how you didn’t get it? I’ll bet your family rues thanksgiving dinner with you.

Kid:” This gravy is the bomb!” U/gmcgath :”I don’t see how this gravy has any relation to explosives nor do I think it’s appropriate to reference such things during dinner. Please keep your compliments to a simple statement using common adjectives.”


AcolyteOfTheHand t1_jcfnutj wrote

Please, next time, don't assume people give a fuck about your opinion Karen. Your lack of knowledge is not anyone else's problem.


BelichicksBurner t1_jcfystm wrote

Thay movie came out before I was born and I understood the reference. I mean, Kevin Bacon dude...


OPINION_IS_UNPOPLAR t1_jcfqcce wrote

Seriously. It came out well before my time and I have never seen it but I still know the reference because it is a really common one…. You must live under a rock


CrotchetAndVomit t1_jcglt48 wrote

Your ignorance isn't my problem. Don't make it my problem with stupid shit like that bill or your comment here.


SheeEttin t1_jchy7x2 wrote

Next time educate yourself instead of advertising your ignorance.