Florida’s Book-Banning Crusade Has Found Its Next Target: Dictionaries

[robosmith]

Florida’s Book-Banning Crusade Has Found Its Next Target: Dictionaries

Quote

The Florida education system has undergone more than two years of belligerent and reactionary upheaval at the hands of Ron DeSantis. The state’s Republican governor, straining to build a popular movement around his conspicuously unpopular presidential campaign, waged this war on educators under the guise of rooting out the “woke” excesses supposedly plaguing public classrooms. But the consequences of DeSantis’s policies are proving as absurd as they are inconvenient for an already beleaguered education force.

Of particular note: A school district in the Florida panhandle recently took dictionaries off the shelves of its school libraries to adhere to a DeSantis law designed to police descriptions of “sexual conduct,” according to the news site Popular Information. Observing the same law, a school district in central Florida has removed 673 books from its classrooms, including Paradise Lost, East of Eden, and other standard fixtures of high school literature classes, the Orlando Sentinel reported.

These inane developments are the outgrowth of a fantastical and bigoted worldview: DeSantis and his ideological allies insist that hordes of teachers and administrators are secretly conspiring to scramble the minds of students, turning them gay, transgender, or nonbinary. To combat this supposed plot, DeSantis has signed a number of laws and regulations demanding schools receive parental consent for a multitude of things. The vague wording used in the laws—along with career-threatening penalties for those who violate them—has led to educators to seek permission from parents before administering even the most basic services, like vision and hearing tests, according to a new report from The New York Times. But often, parents are not readily available. “Nurses are spending most of their time trying to obtain permission,” Florida Association of School Nurses director Lisa Kern told the Times, noting that the upshot of these new bureaucratic hurdles is a decline in the well-being of students. 

Dethantis culture war designed to keep his citizens stupid enough to vote Republican.

[Deluge]

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Florida’s Book-Banning Crusade Has Found Its Next Target: Dictionaries

Dethantis culture war designed to keep his citizens stupid enough to vote Republican.

robopronouns doesn't understand that things like race hustling and pedophilia are actually bad.  

[robosmith]

19 minutes ago, Deluge said:

robopronouns doesn't understand that things like race hustling and pedophilia are actually bad.  

^Nothing to do with banning dictionaries. Duh

[WestCanMan]

Leftards are the ones cancelling people, hate-mongering the unvaxed, calling conservatives white extremist terrorists, running witch hunts and entrapment schemes with the FBI, etc.

Hit the skids, dirt-nugget.

[Deluge]

26 minutes ago, robosmith said:

^Nothing to do with banning dictionaries. Duh

It's a tie-in, you deceitful little f*ck. 

Of course you cultists want to control dictionaries, too. You've already started with wikipedia, the dictionary any ol' piece of sh*t democrat can edit.

[Aristides]

I guess the dumb f**ks have never heard of internet dictionaries. How are they going to ban them?

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

^Nothing to do with banning dictionaries. Duh

Nothing to do with banning anything - the books aren't banned the dictionary isn't banned, you're talking about simply choosing what will be in school libraries.  The books are all widely available.

but if a elementary school doesn't carry it - it's been BAAAANNNNEEED

Yawn.

[Legato]

2 hours ago, robosmith said:

Florida’s Book-Banning Crusade Has Found Its Next Target: Dictionaries

Dethantis culture war designed to keep his citizens stupid enough to vote Republican.

Every time you post some twisted spun nonsense like this. The first ball has you out leg before wicket.

 

 

 

[robosmith]

50 minutes ago, Legato said:

Every time you post some twisted spun nonsense like this.

Prove it. You cannot. 

Let's see your evidence that FL law does not ban the sexual definitions in dictionaries.

 

50 minutes ago, Legato said:

The first ball has you out leg before wicket.

Speak English. This US Federal, we don't play Cricket here. LMAO

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

I guess the dumb f**ks have never heard of internet dictionaries. How are they going to ban them?

They could try IP blocking; at least in the school.

But the kids are probably more computer savvy than the school's IT dept, if they even have one.

[Aristides]

21 minutes ago, robosmith said:

 

They could try IP blocking; at least in the school.

But the kids are probably more computer savvy than the school's IT dept, if they even have one.

They could ask China or North Korea how to do it, they're experts.

[Legato]

19 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Prove it. You cannot. 

Let's see your evidence that FL law does not ban the sexual definitions in dictionaries.

 

Speak English. This US Federal, we don't play Cricket here. LMAO

They could try IP blocking; at least in the school.

But the kids are probably more computer savvy than the school's IT dept, if they even have one.

One Florida school district has removed some from the library to check for sexual content.

Removed and banned have different meanings.

You are out LBW again.

[Aristides]

18 minutes ago, Legato said:

One Florida school district has removed some from the library to check for sexual content.

Removed and banned have different meanings.

You are out LBW again.

Really, what is the difference between removed and banned? If they don't like the definitions are they going to edit the books, reprint them and put them back on the shelves? If not, they are banning them.

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Really, what is the difference between removed and banned? If they don't like the definitions are they going to edit the books, reprint them and put them back on the shelves? If not, they are banning them.

They're not banning them.  It's a childish argument and one best left in the states.  It is idotic to suggest a book that can be bought in most bookstores, ordered online and delivered to your door and is avaialble in paperback, hardcover or ebook is 'banned' just because a couple of libraries don't like them.

And yes - i would fully expect if a text book contained a serious error they might pull that textbook and advise the publisher and see about repurchasing if they correct the mistake later.

Calling it banned is !diotic.  It is not going to be part of the library collection for those schools - just like a LOT of books, most of which have nothing to do with sexuality. Yeash.

[robosmith]

40 minutes ago, Legato said:

One Florida school district has removed some from the library to check for sexual content.

Removed and banned have different meanings.

You are out LBW again.

^This OPINION of yours ONLY proves that you HAVE ONE.

Show us the LAW which specifies exemptions for DICTIONARIES.

[Aristides]

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

They're not banning them.  It's a childish argument and one best left in the states.  It is idotic to suggest a book that can be bought in most bookstores, ordered online and delivered to your door and is avaialble in paperback, hardcover or ebook is 'banned' just because a couple of libraries don't like them.

And yes - i would fully expect if a text book contained a serious error they might pull that textbook and advise the publisher and see about repurchasing if they correct the mistake later.

Calling it banned is !diotic.  It is not going to be part of the library collection for those schools - just like a LOT of books, most of which have nothing to do with sexuality. Yeash.

They are already in the school libraries, it is the government removing them. The schools don't have a say in the matter.

You guys are always complaining about censorship, well, this is censorship.

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

They are already in the school libraries, it is the government removing them. The schools don't have a say in the matter.

The gov't runs the schools.  I'm not going to have to explain why that was a ridiculous thing to say am i?  They're not pulling them from private shelves are they - This is a gov't area of responsibility. They found a book they don't think is appropriate, they pulled it.  There's TONNES of books they don't carry for one reason or another.  They don't carry playboys either, have they 'banned playboy'?

Quote

You guys are always complaining about censorship, well, this is censorship.

If you want to make that argument then call it 'censorship', dont' lie and claim it's 'banning books'.

And you've still got a tough row to hoe there - it is EXPECTED AND PART OF THE JOB for gov'ts to determine what is or is not appropriate for kids of various ages to have in their educational enviorment.

It's not censorship when a gov't says "this doesn't fit with our job as teachers'  If the child was banned from owning a personal copy - THAT might be censorship.  But the parents can buy one for him or her no problem right? Its not even 'banned' from the school grounds - the library won't carry it. that's it.

The library is also not allowed to put up a big banner saying "F#CK BIDEN!!!!".  Is that censorship? Should we be putting up those banners?  The library at a school is not a personal collection, and of COURSE the gov't is going to decide what is and is not appropriate for that particular educational setting.

 

Yet you lefties made a big stink about "banning" dr seuss by forcing 'to think that i saw it on mulberry st'  because it's 'not appropriate'.  Give your head a shake