Author of 'I am Rosa Parks' calls out PA school district for banning book: 'You're on the wrong side'

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Call me a cynic if you must.

But unless kids have changed since I was in elementary school, the best way to get them interested in something is to forbid it. Let them show their rebellious side by reading books like the one in question, or "To Kill a Mockingbird", or whatever.
Pass around a list of books banned(at your grade level), or put "Parental Advisory" on them, or somehow make them forbidden fruit.

It worked in the 70s.
Tom

That's right. And kids have a tendency to actually become adults. Imagine that, kids grow up!

 

[Lumpenproletariat]

Nothing should be banned, as long as taxpayers aren't paying for it.

'You're on the wrong side'

School district says books on race 'frozen' for further vetting

Brad Meltzer, author of "I am Rosa Parks," is speaking out after his children’s book was placed on a banned list by the Central York School District in Pennsylvania. On "Fox & Friends," Meltzer called out the school board for becoming part of cancel culture.

The ban, which impacts books that address race, social justice and history, was implemented in October 2020. According to the school district, the books were not "banned," but rather "frozen" until they can be vetted.

It's OK to include ALL books on controversial topics, no matter what, with no vetting of any kind (other than to ban anything criminal, or inciting to crime), including Communism and Fascism and Race Superiority and Astrology and Witchcraft and Satanism and Flat-Earthism and Creationism and anything else controversial --

as long as taxpayers don't have to pay for it.

But, just as religion may not be taught in public schools, neither should anyone's particular ideology on something controversial, about "social justice" etc., and preaching "You're on the wrong side" etc. All should be included, with no favoritism to any, and none should be paid for with taxpayers' money.

So as long as these books are donated, not tax-paid, there should be no vetting or censorship or limitation put on them. Just don't have taxpayers pay the cost for anything which promotes a particular ideology, such as theories about "race, social justice, and history" which are subjective issues that go in the ideological category, not science. The OP did not say if the book in question is paid for by taxpayers.

What should be taught at taxpayers' expense are math and science and basic language communicating skills. Ideally "history" also should be taught, but only if there's a way to identify the historical facts without mixing ideology in with it.

There needs to be a rethinking, and revision on how to teach:

History/social science --- factual truth vs, subjective theory

Literature --- good stories/poetry vs. bad

Art/music --- good art/music vs. bad

(in that order)

These are getting more and more subjective, and there is increasing difficulty deciding who really is the "expert" who knows the subject accurately, and teaches only the truth, or understands it honestly, as opposed to the quacks or phonies, or the subjectivists whose "knowledge" cannot be verified.

Likewise the books imposed onto the students.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

School district says books on race 'frozen' for further vetting

It's OK to include ALL books on controversial topics, no matter what, with no vetting of any kind (other than to ban anything criminal, or inciting to crime), including Communism and Fascism and Race Superiority and Astrology and Witchcraft and Satanism and Flat-Earthism and Creationism and anything else controversial --

as long as taxpayers don't have to pay for it.

But, just as religion may not be taught in public schools, neither should anyone's particular ideology on something controversial, about "social justice" etc., and preaching "You're on the wrong side" etc. All should be included, with no favoritism to any, and none should be paid for with taxpayers' money.

So as long as these books are donated, not tax-paid, there should be no vetting or censorship or limitation put on them. Just don't have taxpayers pay the cost for anything which promotes a particular ideology, such as theories about "race, social justice, and history" which are subjective issues that go in the ideological category, not science. The OP did not say if the book in question is paid for by taxpayers.

What should be taught at taxpayers' expense are math and science and basic language communicating skills. Ideally "history" also should be taught, but only if there's a way to identify the historical facts without mixing ideology in with it.

There needs to be a rethinking, and revision on how to teach:

History/social science --- factual truth vs, subjective theory

Brilliant! Someone make this person a director of education. Just teach the facts.

Teacher: Germany sent troops to Czechoslovakia.
Student: Why?
Teacher: Can't go into that, too subjective.

Teacher: And on August 6th, the US dropped a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima.
Student: How many people died?
Teacher: That could lead to subjective conversation. And then on August 9th...

Teacher: And on the morning of September 11th, terrorists used planes as weapons against the US.
Student: Why?
Teacher: Do I have to kick you out of here. We can only discuss facts. Context is for communists!

Literature

--- good stories/poetry vs. bad

Art/music --- good art/music vs. bad

Uh oh... wouldn't that be subjective?

These are getting more and more subjective, and there is increasing difficulty deciding who really is the "expert" who knows the subject accurately, and teaches only the truth, or understands it honestly, as opposed to the quacks or phonies, or the subjectivists whose "knowledge" cannot be verified.

Likewise the books imposed onto the students.

Yeah... nothing like the bullshit, baseless, undefended stance that the children are being subjected to improper information. Examples can't be given... too subjective.

 

[laughing dog]

So as long as these books are donated, not tax-paid, there should be no vetting or censorship or limitation put on them. Just don't have taxpayers pay the cost for anything which promotes a particular ideology, such as theories about "race, social justice, and history" which are subjective issues that go in the ideological category, not science. The OP did not say if the book in question is paid for by taxpayers.

It shouldn't matter. Donated books require taxpayer money to support their maintenance and keeping track of them.

What should be taught at taxpayers' expense are math and science and basic language communicating skills. Ideally "history" also should be taught, but only if there's a way to identify the historical facts without mixing ideology in with it.

Since the decisions on what subjects in mathematics, science and basic language communication skills to teach involve some sort of ideology, your methodology would mean no public education.

 

[Keith&Co.]

So, if someone wants to donate 500 copies of Mein Kampf to his kid's school, no vetting? Or 600 copies of "Betty's Beaver Needs A Barber"? sure.

Frankly, if i have 40 minutes of the kid's day, i have to cover the state-mandated curricula (Elements of plot, theme, foreshadowing), the district-mandated vocabulary, enforce the school-mandated policy on phones, earphones, hoodies, spaghetti straps, miniskirts, hair gel, take attendance including magically knowing which ones are at the nurse, counselor, vice principal offices, hand out paper, explain why i no longer hand out pencils, find a power cord for the laptop that died, and get people to discuss the day's chapter of Ethan Frome rather than the fight in the cafeteria, the arrest in the library, the nudity in the parking lot, or Nikki Minaj's father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate's testicles.
I don't have time to cover my ideology, and if i DID, it would be "Bring a goddamned pencil to your fucking classes, you brain-dead goblins!"

 

[Swammerdami]

So as long as these books are donated, not tax-paid, there should be no vetting or censorship or limitation put on them. Just don't have taxpayers pay the cost for anything which promotes a particular ideology, such as theories about "race, social justice, and history" which are subjective issues that go in the ideological category, not science. The OP did not say if the book in question is paid for by taxpayers.

So you would allow "controversial" books to be donated to the school library. Could teachers tout the books for extra reading, or even mention the books at all? Or is that permitted only when the teacher salaries (for minutes spent discussing "controversial" books) were donated instead of tax-payer funded?

The money needed for these donated books is either a little or a lot. If only "a little," why emphasize the donated/tax-paid issue? And if the cost is "a lot", then aren't you proposing a system where Charles Koch and Mark Zuckerberg will be determining what books are in school libraries?

 

[TomC]

So, if someone wants to donate 500 copies of Mein Kampf to his kid's school, no vetting? Or 600 copies of "Betty's Beaver Needs A Barber"? sure.

Frankly, if i have 40 minutes of the kid's day, i have to cover the state-mandated curricula (Elements of plot, theme, foreshadowing), the district-mandated vocabulary, enforce the school-mandated policy on phones, earphones, hoodies, spaghetti straps, miniskirts, hair gel, take attendance including magically knowing which ones are at the nurse, counselor, vice principal offices, hand out paper, explain why i no longer hand out pencils, find a power cord for the laptop that died, and get people to discuss the day's chapter of Ethan Frome rather than the fight in the cafeteria, the arrest in the library, the nudity in the parking lot, or Nikki Minaj's father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate's testicles.
I don't have time to cover my ideology, and if i DID, it would be "Bring a goddamned pencil to your fucking classes, you brain-dead goblins!"

Haha!

Rather like policing, teaching is a job I totally don't want in the modern USA. Being expected to both do your job and take over for lousy parents who don't, and then hammered for not doing both up to the standards of the screechiest video poster, is not something I'd wish on my worst enemy.
Tom