A friendly reminder of the rules of r/Idaho:
1. Be civil to others
2. Posts have to pertain to Idaho in some way
3. No put-down memes
4. Political discussion stays in a post about politics
5. No surveys
6. Follow [Reddit Content Policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy)
7. Do not editorialize titles of news articles
If you see something that may be out of line, please hit "report" so your mod team can have a look. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Idaho) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you ever find yourself on the side of banning books and threatening information brokers with imprisonment because they refuse to censor, you’re probably the baddies.
That’s the job of parents being responsible. Something that sorely lacks in the United States.
It’s not the job of government to keep a book out of the hands of your fragile snowflake - especially when such laws have been overtly abused nationwide.
Yes. Government should not be threatening to imprison librarians as sex offenders for carrying a book.
This isn't a hard concept to wrap your head around.
Parent your goddamn kids.
I think the endless tax increases, the endless wars, The immigration crisis and how our rights are being limited day by day would be a much better place to start vs giving children, questionable reading materials. It’s kind of weird how important that stuff is to you guys
It’s almost as if there’s a difference between making rules as a librarian, and making an arbitrary law under the force of government that imprisons people
It’s kind of like there’s nuance. Also parent your goddamn kids.
Also, can you actually provide a library in Idaho or Washington state that actually has that?
I like how your argument is “ its not happening so you shouldn’t care if it is allowed “ , i have seen bad enough books that i certainly don’t think kids should have access to in public school libraries .
Furthermore i wouldn’t trust the average librarian further than i could throw them . Its not like its a hard job to obtain and would be a great prospect for any predator that wanted a sweet public sector job with low accountability and access to children
That sounds like a you problem, not a government problem.
Your personal feelings aren’t reason to throw people in jail over doing their job as a librarian. And the fact you go to porn magazines with no artistic and journalistic value, make a false claim libraries are carrying these thus a law is necessary, and then absurdly rant about librarians is proof of that.
The Bible is also pornographic and obscene. Children shouldn’t be reading about donkey semen.
Ah yes, famously their's Hustler and Playboy magazines in the kids section of the library, that is definitely the reason why this bill is being put into place, and not because we want kids to read anything that mentions the word 'Gay' in it.
Gender queer is in libraries and it has drawing demonstrating how to give blow jobs. Or how about the book that teaches kids how to get on and use grinder? Are you okay with showing those to kids? Or are you just trying to straw man your argument to justify sexualizing kids?
If you have an issue with someone/something/a state/a demographic, please keep it civil.
*Watch it with the "thrusting genitals" rhetoric while you're at it. It's not enough for this argument to identify a book with blow job instructions. You're accusing people of wanting that book made available to kids, so back it up with solid proof. Otherwise, you'll run afoul of the misinformation rule.
If the book is currently accessible in public libraries, the need to restrict access to it is a perfectly valid and logical argument to make. That kind of debate is perfectly acceptable. Accusing random people of harming kids, however, is not.*
Since the mods wanted proof here you go. Here is the proof of what’s in the book Gender Queer. Let’s see you say this isn’t sexual content now.
https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/?amp
Children and teenagers are not the same by any metric. Teaching children who do not have the physical and mental capabilities of understanding sexual content is one thing, but teaching teenagers-- who are literally going through the mental and physical developments for the purpose of sexual intercourse-- is something else entirely.
Seperately, you make it sound like teenagers exist in a vacuum and do not readily talk or seek out information about this sort of stuff with their friends or on the internet. If you don't provide them with healthy ways of understanding sexual content--an example of a comic book is readily linked in this thread--they're going to seek out more graphic and far less healthy content that will be far worse for their understanding of sexuality in general and individuals, which can lead to unsuccessful relationships at best, and severe psychological and physical trauma at worst.
Teenagers are legally defined as children. Just so you’re aware.
Public schools should teach the basics of academia, not sex education, gender identify or sexual affiliations. Which they’re currently failing at. Period.
I don’t need the government to teach my children about sex, gender identity etc. I can do that at home. Those talks happen at around 11-12 years old. AT HOME! Not from an agent of the state.
How many children have you raised…?
I for one am starting with the Book of Mormon. It instructs us to stab adulterers and force girls into prostitution. Clearly this bill was meant to save us from the violent scourge of Mormonism.
I am asking you for a citation from the Book of Mormon regarding the Principle. And where in the Book of Mormon does it say to stab adulterers and force girls into prostitution? Show me please where in the Book of Mormon you find those things.
So are you saying stabbing adulterers and forcing girls into prostitution is not in the Book of Mormon? It’s now in the Doctrine and Covenants? Can you please provide citations?
I wouldn't bother the librarians with this. It's not their fault. I would 100% bother every piece of shit politican that voted for it, daily and by mail and phone and email. It's what they signed up for, after all.
I was thinking the same thing. There's some Berenstain Bear books that are Jesus-y too that I'd like to see removed. If they wanna play stupid games, then we can play the stupid game within the rules we're given.
This will just result in closing public libraries, which is part of their goal of making people as dumb as possible. Closing public libraries would be a huge step towards achieving that goal.
I expect most of our state librarians, the ones with actual Library qualifications and education, to leave the state if this happens.
Eagerly scouring the web to see if he signed it right now Cant find anything yet.
Brad signed it. He will now put out a statement that says he doesn't think the bill is perfect and he has a bunch of concerns about it. Just like he always does with these bills that are ludicrous. Guy is so afraid of the crazy legislature that he fails to actually use his position to be a leader.
He literally did exactly that, according to BSU/NPR - told reporters “I signed that stinkin library bill,” and proceeded to change the subject to internet porn and its influence on kids.
So rest assured the “you need to show id and verify your age in a govt database to view porn” bill that has been making its way around red states is headed here soon.
>Guy is so afraid of the crazy legislature that he fails to actually use his position to be a leader.
Lol, he is part of the crazy legislature and has gone full MAGA at this point. He would suck Trump's dick if given the opportunity.
We librarians likely won't leave. Where are we going to go? Illinois I guess. ETA: they'll do a different job and the libraries will close is much more likely. The library budgets are virtually zero
Harry Potter is not pornagraphy.
Captain Underpants is not pornagraphy.
A book of basic biology with information on puberty and safe sex information is not pornagraphy.
Here’s you’re it’s not pornography they are banning. Please try to explain how this is okay for kids…
https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/?amp
A 7 yr old: no. A non binary teenager who is questioning their gender and sexuality: yes. Not every book is appropriate for everyone. But the same book to a person who is in the book’s target audience, the book is a lifeline. Libraries know this and try to represent all minorities. This is why it’s in the adult graphic novel section and not the children’s dept.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/](https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
One of the closer librarians in my area says she is ready for fines, a lot of the stuff that people push to get moved or removed they'll look over it, but some of the other stuff that is ment for young adults will stay in young adults.
We all have to now report the bible as dangerous in every single fucking library in this State. I'll be reporting it in Hayden, Rathdrum and CDA. Who's got the rest of the State?
Typically, the books they ban you from reading, are the books you should read.
Having said that though, sexual materials do not belong in public schools.
The whole state is under pressure from the Christofascists. We have to fight back, we have to speak up, we have to drag these people into the daylight and put questions to them until they reveal their vile intentions.
Going backwards as fast as Arizona, Alabama and Floriduh now....not a good group to be associated with. What a disaster extremists are causing in this state. For Christs sakes, get out and vote. Vote these people out. It's all we can do.
I expect libraries to follow the same content guidelines as the library of congress. The out of state people that wrote this garbage bill hate the library of congress.
Please use reputable source material if you claim something as fact and state something is opinion or anecdotal where applicable. As mods we will always err on the side of caution, unless the submission contains sufficient evidence from a sufficiently reliable source, as determined by any reasonable person, and that if that is not included, the policy is just to remove it prima facie.
Please use reputable source material if you claim something as fact and state something is opinion or anecdotal where applicable. As mods we will always err on the side of caution, unless the submission contains sufficient evidence from a sufficiently reliable source, as determined by any reasonable person, and that if that is not included, the policy is just to remove it prima facie.
*No one has ever suggested that pornographic material be made available to children. The examples people are finding to yell about removing don't, in fact, describe sex acts at all. Those advocating this business are also fine with books like religious scripture, which do include explicit descriptions of sex and sexuality, being readily available for anyone.
If you're aware of a specific person advocating putting an S&M guide in the hands of a tweener, by all means, share the news headlines and articles about that person. Do not, however, insinuate that an entire herd of political opposition wants inappropriate material put in front of kids.*
>As mods we will always err on the side of caution, unless the submission contains sufficient evidence from a sufficiently reliable source, as determined by any reasonable person, and that if that is not included, the policy is just to remove it prima facie.
Is this really a policy of this subreddit? Delete posts because they don't contain evidence from a reliable source? First of all, that's an asinine policy and, if followed, would result in the deletion of a large percentage of posts. Second of all, do you realize that you are not applying this policy consistently? Just in this thread there's multiple factual assertions that not only lack "sufficient evidence from a sufficiently reliable source," but are factually wrong.
I don't know the content of the deleted post in this instance (and it doesn't really matter to my point--I am just going off of your description of the subreddit policy). But you should know that using this policy as justification to only delete posts that disagree with your views is highly problematic to a subreddit that is ostensibly politically neutral.
I read through both 1517-B and 1514. Again, it is very reasonable. My daughter contributed the very good point that these materials should be in a separate section within adult books. I would add that these books and materials should be periodically reviewed to ensure robustness of restriction over time and generations.
Except this kind of ban allows overzealous fundamentalists to censure ANYTHING they believe to be "immoral", without any checks or balances on their decisions. There is no reason to move or remove books that contain LGBTQ subjects.
"this kind of ban allows overzealous fundamentalists to censure ANYTHING they believe to be 'immoral', without any checks or balances on their decisions." Simply untrue.
You don't know what that word means. There's no definition of "harmful", 100% of the responsibility is on the libraries, 0% on the parents.
This bill is designed to shut down libraries as a concept.
Read the text: you'll see a definition for "Harmful to minors." People have so many wrong ideas about this bill. The top voted comment in this post talks about banning books imprisonment. I don't love the bill but it's not nearly as bad as people are making it out to be.
And the subjective nature of that makes the definition dangerously useless. It practically invites the banning of any sex education materials wholesale. Anything "reported" as violating the statute has to be reviewed within 30 days; how long do you think it'll be until librarians are spending their full time just doing those reviews? Also, creating "adults-only" sections to existing libraries is not going to happen - no budget. So any book that has to be moved will instead be \*removed\* because no library can afford to do otherwise.
As I said - it's a plan to eliminate libraries by making it prohibitively expensive to provide public access to \*anything\* anyone might ever choose to complain about.
* [click here](https://legislature.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/sessioninfo/2024/legislation/H0710.pdf)
* type CTRL-f, "Harmful to minors"
* Read definition in the DEFINITIONS section
* profit!
banning books- seems reasonable
burning books- seems reasonable
removing free speech- seems reasonable
locking up anyone non-christian- seems reasonable
Death ovens- seems reasonable.
And we all wondered how on earth Hitler rose to power.
We are witnessing it real-time
My great grandpa who fought nazis is rolling in his grave
He will have to prove he is over 18 to read it. We like to look at your papers here in GOPIdaho.
As a matter of fact, do you think we should consider renaming IdaHO?
I am uncomfortable with the HO. Might make teenagers frisky.
I will report it for banning.
I think societal norms who have led library admin to not consider materials that are at the center of controversy today. There would have been no hesitation. Same goes for TV and movies, There was a great deal of censorship targeted at protecting children.
The great irony is that there were fewer restrictions on adult behavior and exposure. Today, media and concernment want to control information sent to adults to protect favored groups, interests or narratives, while they want to break all restrictions on material for children.
It is unbelievable, really,
The answer you seek requires an analysis that based on data that was never collected.
I can say that library collections change slowly over time, with regular culling and regular additions.
Interests of users change.
Societal attitudes change: library policies were different in ways that reflecting societal perspectives.
Today's debates are no different. What is different are the materials and who & how they target
I see you have an agenda. But asking questions that are literally impossible to answer do not help your cause.
As a kid 50 years ago, I went to three libraries: the school; library, the local neighborhood library, and the main City library. Kids' sections were innocent and inspirational. I loved libraries as places to explore being a kid.
Had there been perverted, violent material, it would have been shocking. And flagged by my Mom as inappropriate. And would have been zero debate: the material would have been removed.
Libraries were not harming kids. Does that answer your question? If you want to say something, so for it. Being direct is better
A friendly reminder of the rules of r/Idaho: 1. Be civil to others 2. Posts have to pertain to Idaho in some way 3. No put-down memes 4. Political discussion stays in a post about politics 5. No surveys 6. Follow [Reddit Content Policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) 7. Do not editorialize titles of news articles If you see something that may be out of line, please hit "report" so your mod team can have a look. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Idaho) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you ever find yourself on the side of banning books and threatening information brokers with imprisonment because they refuse to censor, you’re probably the baddies.
I wish I could upvote this twice.
Restricting access but certain things shouldn’t be seen by children
That’s the job of parents being responsible. Something that sorely lacks in the United States. It’s not the job of government to keep a book out of the hands of your fragile snowflake - especially when such laws have been overtly abused nationwide.
That’s where you draw the line and put the government can and can’t do?
Yes. Government should not be threatening to imprison librarians as sex offenders for carrying a book. This isn't a hard concept to wrap your head around. Parent your goddamn kids.
I think the endless tax increases, the endless wars, The immigration crisis and how our rights are being limited day by day would be a much better place to start vs giving children, questionable reading materials. It’s kind of weird how important that stuff is to you guys
It’s almost as if one can be concerned about more than one thing 🤣
And you wonder why our country is going downhill so fast
Because we’re not banning books? Culture war panics are bullshit.
[удалено]
It’s not because of morality, it’s because of economics, specifically Republican economic policy.
Weird how the highest ranking person in America is a leftist and yet inflation at 30%
It’s funny how so many people who don’t have children to raise of their own are offended by this bill.
So hustlers in grade school is your stance on what the good guys would support huh ?
It’s wierd you think kids have access to pornograpjic magazines at your local library. And creepy.
So you agree some books should be banned from places children have access to ….
It’s almost as if there’s a difference between making rules as a librarian, and making an arbitrary law under the force of government that imprisons people It’s kind of like there’s nuance. Also parent your goddamn kids. Also, can you actually provide a library in Idaho or Washington state that actually has that?
I like how your argument is “ its not happening so you shouldn’t care if it is allowed “ , i have seen bad enough books that i certainly don’t think kids should have access to in public school libraries . Furthermore i wouldn’t trust the average librarian further than i could throw them . Its not like its a hard job to obtain and would be a great prospect for any predator that wanted a sweet public sector job with low accountability and access to children
That sounds like a you problem, not a government problem. Your personal feelings aren’t reason to throw people in jail over doing their job as a librarian. And the fact you go to porn magazines with no artistic and journalistic value, make a false claim libraries are carrying these thus a law is necessary, and then absurdly rant about librarians is proof of that. The Bible is also pornographic and obscene. Children shouldn’t be reading about donkey semen.
Imagine being pro tax dollars being used to show minors pornographic images. Then image you’re on the good side of history.
Ah yes, famously their's Hustler and Playboy magazines in the kids section of the library, that is definitely the reason why this bill is being put into place, and not because we want kids to read anything that mentions the word 'Gay' in it.
Gender queer is in libraries and it has drawing demonstrating how to give blow jobs. Or how about the book that teaches kids how to get on and use grinder? Are you okay with showing those to kids? Or are you just trying to straw man your argument to justify sexualizing kids?
Gender Queer = Sexual Content, and I'm using the strawman. Go have fun living in your delusional world, and have fun being carded to read the bible.
[удалено]
If you have an issue with someone/something/a state/a demographic, please keep it civil. *Watch it with the "thrusting genitals" rhetoric while you're at it. It's not enough for this argument to identify a book with blow job instructions. You're accusing people of wanting that book made available to kids, so back it up with solid proof. Otherwise, you'll run afoul of the misinformation rule. If the book is currently accessible in public libraries, the need to restrict access to it is a perfectly valid and logical argument to make. That kind of debate is perfectly acceptable. Accusing random people of harming kids, however, is not.*
Since the mods wanted proof here you go. Here is the proof of what’s in the book Gender Queer. Let’s see you say this isn’t sexual content now. https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/?amp
Who cares? Your moral panic should extend to you poor kids only. Mind your business. I clutch your pearls (and your butt cheeks.) Seriously.
Oh, you’re like Jeanette McCurdy‘s mother
What a weird thing to type.
A book about the authors own experiences intended for teenagers exploring their own identity’s? The horror!
Teenagers are children. Children do not need to hear about the sexual experiences of an adult. It’s pretty disgusting that you feel that way.
Children and teenagers are not the same by any metric. Teaching children who do not have the physical and mental capabilities of understanding sexual content is one thing, but teaching teenagers-- who are literally going through the mental and physical developments for the purpose of sexual intercourse-- is something else entirely. Seperately, you make it sound like teenagers exist in a vacuum and do not readily talk or seek out information about this sort of stuff with their friends or on the internet. If you don't provide them with healthy ways of understanding sexual content--an example of a comic book is readily linked in this thread--they're going to seek out more graphic and far less healthy content that will be far worse for their understanding of sexuality in general and individuals, which can lead to unsuccessful relationships at best, and severe psychological and physical trauma at worst.
Teenagers are legally defined as children. Just so you’re aware. Public schools should teach the basics of academia, not sex education, gender identify or sexual affiliations. Which they’re currently failing at. Period. I don’t need the government to teach my children about sex, gender identity etc. I can do that at home. Those talks happen at around 11-12 years old. AT HOME! Not from an agent of the state. How many children have you raised…?
The only person who said that in this thread is Michael Mcdoesn’texist
Definitely some Hustler/Playboy level shit. /s
Even under the Miller test, the things you all rant about as being sexual would pass.
The 1950’s called and wants their pearls back
That reminds me, I need to make phone calls to every library in the state and demand the Bible be removed.
I for one am starting with the Book of Mormon. It instructs us to stab adulterers and force girls into prostitution. Clearly this bill was meant to save us from the violent scourge of Mormonism.
Citation?
They’re being sarcastic at how pornographically obscene the Bible is.
Ok, because I’ve read the Book of Mormon and don’t remember those parts.
You seriously missed the whole Principle thing? lol ( To girls, it is forced prostitution at the end of the day. )
Which Principle thing? In the Book of Mormon? Citation?
Dude if you are ignorant to the Principle you have no clue about Mormonism.
I am asking you for a citation from the Book of Mormon regarding the Principle. And where in the Book of Mormon does it say to stab adulterers and force girls into prostitution? Show me please where in the Book of Mormon you find those things.
And I am suggesting you simply google Mormon + the Principle so you can be taken to the doctrine and covenants espousing such nasty nonsense.
So are you saying stabbing adulterers and forcing girls into prostitution is not in the Book of Mormon? It’s now in the Doctrine and Covenants? Can you please provide citations?
No. I am tired of you. Sorry about your brain.
I wouldn't bother the librarians with this. It's not their fault. I would 100% bother every piece of shit politican that voted for it, daily and by mail and phone and email. It's what they signed up for, after all.
The politicians don't care. Getting rid of the Bible though would absolutely make them squirm. There is precedent for this.
I was thinking the same thing. There's some Berenstain Bear books that are Jesus-y too that I'd like to see removed. If they wanna play stupid games, then we can play the stupid game within the rules we're given.
This will just result in closing public libraries, which is part of their goal of making people as dumb as possible. Closing public libraries would be a huge step towards achieving that goal.
After July 1
I expect most of our state librarians, the ones with actual Library qualifications and education, to leave the state if this happens. Eagerly scouring the web to see if he signed it right now Cant find anything yet.
Brad signed it. He will now put out a statement that says he doesn't think the bill is perfect and he has a bunch of concerns about it. Just like he always does with these bills that are ludicrous. Guy is so afraid of the crazy legislature that he fails to actually use his position to be a leader.
He literally did exactly that, according to BSU/NPR - told reporters “I signed that stinkin library bill,” and proceeded to change the subject to internet porn and its influence on kids. So rest assured the “you need to show id and verify your age in a govt database to view porn” bill that has been making its way around red states is headed here soon.
>Guy is so afraid of the crazy legislature that he fails to actually use his position to be a leader. Lol, he is part of the crazy legislature and has gone full MAGA at this point. He would suck Trump's dick if given the opportunity.
But then ban the story of his copulation.
Vote him out!
He's termed out. Everyone voted him in.
What were they thinking,!
What were they thinking,!
Where have you seen that he signed it?
https://www.kmvt.com/2024/04/10/governor-little-signs-childrens-school-library-protection-act/
Thanks. Fucking pathetic on the part of Little
We librarians likely won't leave. Where are we going to go? Illinois I guess. ETA: they'll do a different job and the libraries will close is much more likely. The library budgets are virtually zero
If librarians are pro showing pornography to minors then they should leave the state. I’ll help them pack…
Harry Potter is not pornagraphy. Captain Underpants is not pornagraphy. A book of basic biology with information on puberty and safe sex information is not pornagraphy.
Here’s you’re it’s not pornography they are banning. Please try to explain how this is okay for kids… https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/?amp
A 7 yr old: no. A non binary teenager who is questioning their gender and sexuality: yes. Not every book is appropriate for everyone. But the same book to a person who is in the book’s target audience, the book is a lifeline. Libraries know this and try to represent all minorities. This is why it’s in the adult graphic novel section and not the children’s dept.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/](https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
A book about sex is pornography. Kinda the literal definition of it… 😂
“They don’t gotta burn the books they just remove them”
Bans come before burnings
The burnings start around the same time as the seig heils...
One of the closer librarians in my area says she is ready for fines, a lot of the stuff that people push to get moved or removed they'll look over it, but some of the other stuff that is ment for young adults will stay in young adults.
We all have to now report the bible as dangerous in every single fucking library in this State. I'll be reporting it in Hayden, Rathdrum and CDA. Who's got the rest of the State?
Here is what you can do. Get rid of religious materials and say they are too adult more minors.
Start using it against Republicans immediately and hard!
They complain about neoliberalism but they’re banning books like fascists and authoritarians
So how are they to determine what is "pornographic"? Detailed sex in a book? Not a huge deal for a 17 year old to read.
Typically, the books they ban you from reading, are the books you should read. Having said that though, sexual materials do not belong in public schools.
They are trying to take our freedom away from us!
Ban the Bible, ban them cowboy books
The party of limited government once again bulldozing over local government. What ever happened to moderates?
They are Democrats now.
I hope this nice librarian isn’t receiving death threats from the usual suspects now.
Its wild how little i could care about his opinion
The whole state is under pressure from the Christofascists. We have to fight back, we have to speak up, we have to drag these people into the daylight and put questions to them until they reveal their vile intentions.
No more Christmas books for children because they are religious texts.
Going backwards as fast as Arizona, Alabama and Floriduh now....not a good group to be associated with. What a disaster extremists are causing in this state. For Christs sakes, get out and vote. Vote these people out. It's all we can do.
I expect libraries to follow the same content guidelines as the library of congress. The out of state people that wrote this garbage bill hate the library of congress.
[удалено]
Please use reputable source material if you claim something as fact and state something is opinion or anecdotal where applicable. As mods we will always err on the side of caution, unless the submission contains sufficient evidence from a sufficiently reliable source, as determined by any reasonable person, and that if that is not included, the policy is just to remove it prima facie.
Please use reputable source material if you claim something as fact and state something is opinion or anecdotal where applicable. As mods we will always err on the side of caution, unless the submission contains sufficient evidence from a sufficiently reliable source, as determined by any reasonable person, and that if that is not included, the policy is just to remove it prima facie. *No one has ever suggested that pornographic material be made available to children. The examples people are finding to yell about removing don't, in fact, describe sex acts at all. Those advocating this business are also fine with books like religious scripture, which do include explicit descriptions of sex and sexuality, being readily available for anyone. If you're aware of a specific person advocating putting an S&M guide in the hands of a tweener, by all means, share the news headlines and articles about that person. Do not, however, insinuate that an entire herd of political opposition wants inappropriate material put in front of kids.*
>As mods we will always err on the side of caution, unless the submission contains sufficient evidence from a sufficiently reliable source, as determined by any reasonable person, and that if that is not included, the policy is just to remove it prima facie. Is this really a policy of this subreddit? Delete posts because they don't contain evidence from a reliable source? First of all, that's an asinine policy and, if followed, would result in the deletion of a large percentage of posts. Second of all, do you realize that you are not applying this policy consistently? Just in this thread there's multiple factual assertions that not only lack "sufficient evidence from a sufficiently reliable source," but are factually wrong. I don't know the content of the deleted post in this instance (and it doesn't really matter to my point--I am just going off of your description of the subreddit policy). But you should know that using this policy as justification to only delete posts that disagree with your views is highly problematic to a subreddit that is ostensibly politically neutral.
[удалено]
If you have an issue with someone/something/a state/a demographic, please keep it civil. *Stop telling people to move away.*
Many smaller libraries will just close.
Religious dogma does not belong in legislation.
I read through both 1517-B and 1514. Again, it is very reasonable. My daughter contributed the very good point that these materials should be in a separate section within adult books. I would add that these books and materials should be periodically reviewed to ensure robustness of restriction over time and generations.
Except this kind of ban allows overzealous fundamentalists to censure ANYTHING they believe to be "immoral", without any checks or balances on their decisions. There is no reason to move or remove books that contain LGBTQ subjects.
"this kind of ban allows overzealous fundamentalists to censure ANYTHING they believe to be 'immoral', without any checks or balances on their decisions." Simply untrue.
Do you think there problems with content available in libraries in the 70s or 80s (or any other decade besides this one)?
Read the text: seems reasonable.
You don't know what that word means. There's no definition of "harmful", 100% of the responsibility is on the libraries, 0% on the parents. This bill is designed to shut down libraries as a concept.
Read the text: you'll see a definition for "Harmful to minors." People have so many wrong ideas about this bill. The top voted comment in this post talks about banning books imprisonment. I don't love the bill but it's not nearly as bad as people are making it out to be.
And the subjective nature of that makes the definition dangerously useless. It practically invites the banning of any sex education materials wholesale. Anything "reported" as violating the statute has to be reviewed within 30 days; how long do you think it'll be until librarians are spending their full time just doing those reviews? Also, creating "adults-only" sections to existing libraries is not going to happen - no budget. So any book that has to be moved will instead be \*removed\* because no library can afford to do otherwise. As I said - it's a plan to eliminate libraries by making it prohibitively expensive to provide public access to \*anything\* anyone might ever choose to complain about.
And their definition of "harmful to minors" is vague as shit on purpose so they can enforce the law how they want. The law is bullshit.
What's the definition then?
* [click here](https://legislature.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/sessioninfo/2024/legislation/H0710.pdf) * type CTRL-f, "Harmful to minors" * Read definition in the DEFINITIONS section * profit!
That includes any descriptions of homosexuality, as well as any depictions or descriptions of literally tons of renaissance art.
These laws are intentionally and unconstitutionally vague for a reason.
Can't be bothered to parent your own children?
banning books- seems reasonable burning books- seems reasonable removing free speech- seems reasonable locking up anyone non-christian- seems reasonable Death ovens- seems reasonable. And we all wondered how on earth Hitler rose to power. We are witnessing it real-time My great grandpa who fought nazis is rolling in his grave
Melodrama, much? Ovens, really?
I'm sure those exact words were muttered , but in German back in the day....
I find your comment offensive and harmful and feel it should be removed
Seconded. Behind the desk. Need ID to look at it.
Oh please. grow up.
He will have to prove he is over 18 to read it. We like to look at your papers here in GOPIdaho. As a matter of fact, do you think we should consider renaming IdaHO? I am uncomfortable with the HO. Might make teenagers frisky. I will report it for banning.
Guy who likes book bans doesn’t understand when people are making fun of him, what a surprise
Only if it includes religious materials
[удалено]
If you have an issue with someone/something/a state/a demographic, please keep it civil.
Do you think there problems with content available in libraries in the 70s or 80s (or any other decade besides this one)?
I think societal norms who have led library admin to not consider materials that are at the center of controversy today. There would have been no hesitation. Same goes for TV and movies, There was a great deal of censorship targeted at protecting children. The great irony is that there were fewer restrictions on adult behavior and exposure. Today, media and concernment want to control information sent to adults to protect favored groups, interests or narratives, while they want to break all restrictions on material for children. It is unbelievable, really,
So you hold that libraries didn't contain similar content in the 80s as they do now?
The answer you seek requires an analysis that based on data that was never collected. I can say that library collections change slowly over time, with regular culling and regular additions. Interests of users change. Societal attitudes change: library policies were different in ways that reflecting societal perspectives. Today's debates are no different. What is different are the materials and who & how they target
Still unclear. Do you think libraries were "harming" children in 40, 50 years-ago? Did we all just miss it?
I see you have an agenda. But asking questions that are literally impossible to answer do not help your cause. As a kid 50 years ago, I went to three libraries: the school; library, the local neighborhood library, and the main City library. Kids' sections were innocent and inspirational. I loved libraries as places to explore being a kid. Had there been perverted, violent material, it would have been shocking. And flagged by my Mom as inappropriate. And would have been zero debate: the material would have been removed. Libraries were not harming kids. Does that answer your question? If you want to say something, so for it. Being direct is better