Make the parents sign a waiver before allow kids to check out books with adult themes, sure. But banning books from libraries is something I will never agree with. I don’t see how anyone can be for personal liberty and then also ban speech. It’s not conservative, it’s fascist.
To be clear I agree with you that the government has no responsibility to provide a library to anyone. The first amendment not only includes freedom of speech and freedom of association; it also includes freedom to information. If the government is providing a library, such as in a school; it should not be banning books for arbitrary reasons. I tend to trust the discretion of the librarian for which books are available in the library.
An arbitrary reason would be any reason that is used post hoc to ban books that wasn’t an issue until some outrage of the month (ie banning books like “black like me” or “to kill a mockingbird” because of anti-CRT panic)
I mean it’s fundamentally impossible to know about something before it’s, well, made known. Plenty of people have opposed obscene content in schools for ages. They simply hadn’t been made aware of anything specific or actionable until recently.
Make the parents sign a waiver before allow kids to check out books with adult themes, sure. But banning books from libraries is something I will never agree with. I don’t see how anyone can be for personal liberty and then also ban speech. It’s not conservative, it’s fascist.
You’re free to do what you like. Why do you believe that freedom necessitates that the government buy books for you?
To be clear I agree with you that the government has no responsibility to provide a library to anyone. The first amendment not only includes freedom of speech and freedom of association; it also includes freedom to information. If the government is providing a library, such as in a school; it should not be banning books for arbitrary reasons. I tend to trust the discretion of the librarian for which books are available in the library.
And how do you define an arbitrary reason vs a legitimate one?
An arbitrary reason would be any reason that is used post hoc to ban books that wasn’t an issue until some outrage of the month (ie banning books like “black like me” or “to kill a mockingbird” because of anti-CRT panic)
I mean it’s fundamentally impossible to know about something before it’s, well, made known. Plenty of people have opposed obscene content in schools for ages. They simply hadn’t been made aware of anything specific or actionable until recently.
https://www.newsweek.com/when-it-comes-banning-books-both-right-left-are-guilty-opinion-1696045
Yep I’m not subbed here because I think Democrats are blameless. Anyone in favor of banning books, regardless of party, is wrong.
Removed by mod