Nosy School Board Member AKA "Gladys Kravitz" Gets Smacked Off Her Moral High Horse
Nothing quite as sweet as the US Taliban getting BitchSlapped over their butting into everyone else's business
And with kids like the those who stood up to their attempted Censor, there's absolute hope for the future of this country
From the linked article, here are the books at issue
The books are "Beloved" by Toni Morrison, "Slaughterhouse-Five" by Kurt Vonnegut, "The Things They Carried" by Tim O'Brien, "The Awakening" by Kate Chopin, "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, "The Botany of Desire: A Plant's-Eye View of the World" by Michael Pollan, "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" by Stephen Chbosky, "Fallen Angels" by Walter Dean Myers and "How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents" by Julia Alvarez.
bypass registration with this Bug Me Not link
Book-ban debate long, impassioned
More than 500 northwest suburban residents turned out Thursday night for a long and impassioned debate on a proposal to remove nine books from a high school district's reading list, which some said was an attempt at censorship but others supported as an effort to protect students from smut.
*****************************************
More than 350 people signed up to speak, and the meeting room at district headquarters was filled to capacity. Audio of the meeting was piped into an overflow room.
The controversy over the books erupted this month when board member Leslie Pinney flagged books that she said contained explicit sexual images, graphic violence and vulgar language inappropriate for students.
The first image I had when I read this article about Leslie Pinney was of another busybody too nosy for her own good
Thankfully, and most enjoyably from a sheer Schadenfreudistic perspective, the extremists were smacked down by the majority of those who showed up and spoke their piece
The majority of community members who spoke Thursday night were against a ban.
And how humiliating must it be for the apparently easily-afflicted "Gasp & Swoon, Fainting Spells impresario Board Member Leslie Pinney to have been addressed bluntly by some of her students who Leslie Pinney decided-before actually getting their input-had to be shielded from the side of life not covered by Rose Colored Glasses, Happy Little Elves & Adorable Rainbow Ponies
"We deserve the chance to read these books if it pleases us," said Rolling Meadows High School sophomore John Bark, directing his comments to Pinney. "We think for ourselves, regardless of your attempts at censorship. Someone with as much influence as you shouldn't worry about literature. You should be focusing on the drug problems and violence.
"I respect your standpoint on this issue, but you have to understand that we, the students of District 214, will not stand for it."
Resident Bruce Pincknell was one of the few who supported Pinney's plan, saying that teachers promoting the books were motivated by their own progressive social agendas.
The material in the books is obscene at best and pornographic at worst, he said.
Actually, sounding like a member of the ignorant rabble, Bruce Pincknell has that completely backwards, pornography is legal, obscenity is not, and neither are legally accessible for those under 18
A few conservative groups have rallied to Pinney's cause, referring to the books as pornography on their Web sites and urging supporters to attend the board meeting.
*********************
At Prospect High School in Mt. Prospect, about 100 students protested the proposed ban Tuesday by covering logos and slogans on their T-shirts with duct tape. Students then wrote "Censored" on the tape, said sophomore Scott Leipprandt, who started an online petition against Pinney's proposal.
**************************************
But as individual challenges to books appear to be declining, the number of organized challenges is rising as conservative groups such as Virginia-based Parents Against Bad Books in Schools comb through titles and post excerpts on the Web, said Judith Krug, director of the library association's Office for Intellectual Freedom.
"They pick out the things that offend them, like individual words, situations and sexual incidents," Krug said. "They have a right to do it, and that's fine. But when they attempt to remove materials so no one has the choice to read them or not, then we take offense. Because what they're doing is saying, `I know what's good for my children and your children,' and that's not their right."
Once again, if these parents & moral busybodies don't want their kids to read these materials, fine, go ahead and ban away, keep your kids as naive as possible
But when these weak-faithed jackasses start bleating about banning books for OTHERS' children, that's when they've crossed the line and that's when they need to get put in their proper place
And put there HARD
And with kids like the those who stood up to their attempted Censor, there's absolute hope for the future of this country
From the linked article, here are the books at issue
The books are "Beloved" by Toni Morrison, "Slaughterhouse-Five" by Kurt Vonnegut, "The Things They Carried" by Tim O'Brien, "The Awakening" by Kate Chopin, "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, "The Botany of Desire: A Plant's-Eye View of the World" by Michael Pollan, "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" by Stephen Chbosky, "Fallen Angels" by Walter Dean Myers and "How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents" by Julia Alvarez.
bypass registration with this Bug Me Not link
Book-ban debate long, impassioned
More than 500 northwest suburban residents turned out Thursday night for a long and impassioned debate on a proposal to remove nine books from a high school district's reading list, which some said was an attempt at censorship but others supported as an effort to protect students from smut.
*****************************************
More than 350 people signed up to speak, and the meeting room at district headquarters was filled to capacity. Audio of the meeting was piped into an overflow room.
The controversy over the books erupted this month when board member Leslie Pinney flagged books that she said contained explicit sexual images, graphic violence and vulgar language inappropriate for students.
The first image I had when I read this article about Leslie Pinney was of another busybody too nosy for her own good
Thankfully, and most enjoyably from a sheer Schadenfreudistic perspective, the extremists were smacked down by the majority of those who showed up and spoke their piece
The majority of community members who spoke Thursday night were against a ban.
And how humiliating must it be for the apparently easily-afflicted "Gasp & Swoon, Fainting Spells impresario Board Member Leslie Pinney to have been addressed bluntly by some of her students who Leslie Pinney decided-before actually getting their input-had to be shielded from the side of life not covered by Rose Colored Glasses, Happy Little Elves & Adorable Rainbow Ponies
"We deserve the chance to read these books if it pleases us," said Rolling Meadows High School sophomore John Bark, directing his comments to Pinney. "We think for ourselves, regardless of your attempts at censorship. Someone with as much influence as you shouldn't worry about literature. You should be focusing on the drug problems and violence.
"I respect your standpoint on this issue, but you have to understand that we, the students of District 214, will not stand for it."
Resident Bruce Pincknell was one of the few who supported Pinney's plan, saying that teachers promoting the books were motivated by their own progressive social agendas.
The material in the books is obscene at best and pornographic at worst, he said.
Actually, sounding like a member of the ignorant rabble, Bruce Pincknell has that completely backwards, pornography is legal, obscenity is not, and neither are legally accessible for those under 18
A few conservative groups have rallied to Pinney's cause, referring to the books as pornography on their Web sites and urging supporters to attend the board meeting.
*********************
At Prospect High School in Mt. Prospect, about 100 students protested the proposed ban Tuesday by covering logos and slogans on their T-shirts with duct tape. Students then wrote "Censored" on the tape, said sophomore Scott Leipprandt, who started an online petition against Pinney's proposal.
**************************************
But as individual challenges to books appear to be declining, the number of organized challenges is rising as conservative groups such as Virginia-based Parents Against Bad Books in Schools comb through titles and post excerpts on the Web, said Judith Krug, director of the library association's Office for Intellectual Freedom.
"They pick out the things that offend them, like individual words, situations and sexual incidents," Krug said. "They have a right to do it, and that's fine. But when they attempt to remove materials so no one has the choice to read them or not, then we take offense. Because what they're doing is saying, `I know what's good for my children and your children,' and that's not their right."
Once again, if these parents & moral busybodies don't want their kids to read these materials, fine, go ahead and ban away, keep your kids as naive as possible
But when these weak-faithed jackasses start bleating about banning books for OTHERS' children, that's when they've crossed the line and that's when they need to get put in their proper place
And put there HARD
posted by KingCranky II at
10:46 PM
2 Comments:
Your intent is a good one, but there is a giant-sized HOWEVER that must accompany it. Here is the rationale.
One cannot ban the act of banning, which is truly your intent, although it was not explicitly said. Banning the act of banning violates your own crede, which presumably is to support freedoms.
Isn't there a right for people to ban? Isn't banning an act a freedom you would support? If not, aren't you restricting one's right to make adjustments on public education?
On another front, I cannot believe you are claiming all books should be allowed to be taught within public schools, which is also implied by your argument. Right?
We must all agree that there are books that have been published which should NEVER be allowed to enter schools as teachable tools. Would you agree?
EduBlog
By
karadimos, at 11:02 AM
That's the difference between myself and those I bashed
I wouldn't ban their free speech, nor could I logically or realistically either
If the phrase "in their proper place" is what's at issue, take that to mean without the approval of the majority of people in this society
Just like the extremists who tried to use Terri Schiavo to push an extreme agenda in the guise of "family values" got a major slapping from the US public the harder the extremists pushed
I wouldn't be introducing "Mein Kampf", or "The Anarchist Cookbook" for kindergardeners, but if one studies history or civics in high school, then in order to get a better understanding of WW II, and Hitler's role in bringing it about, then it might be advisable to have access to a map of his psychology, hence putting "Mein Kampf" on a recommended reading list, as opposed to a mandatory one, such as a textbook
Now in college, there's obviously no basis for anyone to complain about any required reading for classes, as one does not legally have to attend a college or university to advance in society
As I posted, if parents don't want their kids reading the assigned or recommended texts, they can withdraw their child or request a different text/assignment
But they do NOT have the logical right to deny those texts to anyone else, what's good for them isn't good for everyone else in all circumstances
Free Speech for all, even those who would deny it to me
By
KingCranky II, at 2:04 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home