Utah students can no longer bring personal copies of banned books to school [Lucky thing SLC reversed its ban on the Bible]

[RileyG]

Was there a urinating for distance contest? Did both Tom and Huck use language that I cannot use here or pretty much anywhere else?

I only read the adventures of Tom Sawyer in 7th grade, and it had racial language in it. I never read the adventures of huckleberry Finn.

 

[Always in His Presence]

It is statuary rape by definition and it is not intended as erotica. Do you find statutory rape erotica? I think you do not. So why do you defend it as erotica? What in the scene leads you to believe it is meant to be erotic?

Why are you defending child pornography?

Did you read the book?

I have not read the entire book, but I am well aware of the issues behind it. I've seen the pornography and it made me sick. I can't post even an edited version of the pictures without being permabanned from this site. I cannot legally mail a copy of the depictions - email or text copies of the depictions of a child having sex without ending up in prison.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Hmmm.....

Ever read IT by Stephen King? I read it when I was 14 in less than two weeks.

And yes, King has since denounced that infamous scene.

I don’t read such things, am way too busy and have no need or want.

I don’t know what infamous scene you are referring to. But if it depicts child pornography he deserves to go to jail for a long time.

 

[RileyG]

I don’t read such things, am way too busy and have no need or want.

I don’t know what infamous scene you are referring to. But if it depicts child pornography he deserves to go to jail for a long time.

Well….he’s 77 and may have 10+ years left, know to God. I won’t go into detail about that scene because it goes against forum rules.

Blessings

 

[RileyG]

Why are you defending child pornography?

I have not read the entire book, but I am well aware of the issues behind it. I've seen the pornography and it made me sick. I can't post even an edited version of the pictures without being permabanned from this site. I cannot legally mail a copy of the depictions - email or text copies of the depictions of a child having sex without ending up in prison.

Yikes! I have no interest in reading that book either!

 

[Always in His Presence]

It is statuary rape by definition and it is not intended as erotica. Do you find statutory rape erotica? I think you do not. So why do you defend it as erotica? What in the scene leads you to believe it is meant to be erotic?

Statutory rape of a child -

I'm not a homosexual nor a pedophile. You would have to ask one of those deviants if they find it erotica.

Personally I have not used the term and I am still trying to understand why you are defending depictions of child abuse.

 

[Belk]

Why are you defending child pornography?

I have not read the entire book, but I am well aware of the issues behind it. I've seen the pornography and it made me sick. I can't post even an edited version of the pictures without being permabanned from this site. I cannot legally mail a copy of the depictions - email or text copies of the depictions of a child having sex without ending up in prison.

I must of missed where the book has been banned by law which is what happens with even fake depictions of child pornography. Where did that happen?

 

[Always in His Presence]

I must of missed where the book has been banned by law which is what happens with even fake depictions of child pornography. Where did that happen?

A child having sex is child pornography. If you cannot recognize that. The issue is not mine.

 

[Belk]

Statutory rape of a child -

I'm not a homosexual nor a pedophile. You would have to ask one of those deviants if they find it erotica.

Personally I have not used the term and I am still trying to understand why you are defending depictions of child abuse.

I'm asking you since you claim it is "child pornography" which is erotica. But I will reiterate my question. When was this book banned which is what happens with child pornography in the US. So when did that happen?

 

[Belk]

A child having sex is child pornography. If you cannot recognize that. The issue is not mine.

So it has been banned under US child porn laws?

Obviously not if we are discussing it being in libraries. Ergo it is not child porn no matter how many times you mislabel it.

 

[ozso]

Only one I'm aware of. That is not "oodles" and not a standard I find relevant. We do not determine erotica by "allowed to be read in a meeting".

Then those parents are free to not have their kids read those books. I don't see why they should decide this for other parents who are fine with it.

No, I object to the ongoing culture war attempts to control access by people simply because they find certain ideas objectionable. You don't like it, don't read it. Stop trying to control everyone else.

The situation is what it is, and there's been a turning point where the public has had enough of transgenderism and lgbtqqip2saa+in general being rammed down kids throats. It's probably one of the main reasons why so many voted republican.

 

[RileyG]

A child having sex is child pornography. If you cannot recognize that. The issue is not mine.

Errr….Loretta Lynn (rest in peace) was married at 14, and became a grandmother at 29.

In the movie “Coal Miner’s Daughter” Lynn was played by Sissy Spacek (then in her early 30s) there’s a scene where she loses her virginity at 14 and cries out to her mother because she is in pain.

Based on that context, is that considered pornography?

It’s a movie. Fake. I don’t think so.

I’m not arguing with your definition. But when it’s written in literature or portrayed in movies, can it be considered “pornography?” So to speak?

 

[ozso]

So it has been banned under US child porn laws?

Obviously not if we are discussing it being in libraries. Ergo it is not child porn no matter how many times you mislabel it.

Some stuff manages to slide through. In another thread there's a discussion about full fontal nudity photos of children taken by Sally Mann being on display somewhere. She managed to get away with what most others probably would have been arrested for.

 

[Belk]

The situation is what it is, and there's been a turning point where the public has had enough of transgenderism and lgbtqqip2saa+in general being rammed down kids throats. It's probably one of the main reasons why so many voted republican.

No, not "the public". It is still just a vocal minority. And making a book available is not ramming anything down anyone's throat.

And the number of republican voters remained consistent from four years ago.

 

[Belk]

Some stuff manages to slide through. In another thread there's a discussion about full fontal nudity photos of children taken by Sally Mann being on display somewhere. She managed to get away with what most others probably would have been arrested for.

There are pictures of me in a tub as a two year old. Not child pornography. there are times when it is legitimately useful to show certain subject matter in order to elaborate a point. This is not rocket surgery.

 

[RileyG]

There are pictures of me in a tub as a two year old. Not child pornography. there are times when it is legitimately useful to show certain subject matter in order to elaborate a point. This is not rocket surgery.

Same here. The 1990s. Plenty of pictures and videos of me and my brothers in the bath tub.

 

[ozso]

There are pictures of me in a tub as a two year old. Not child pornography. there are times when it is legitimately useful to show certain subject matter in order to elaborate a point. This is not rocket surgery.

No it's a matter of some professional photographers getting away with photos most others would get in trouble for taking and publishing. Likewise some professional authors get away with writing stuff that most others would get in trouble for writing and publishing. It's a double standards issue.

 

[Belk]

No it's a matter of some professional photographers getting away with photos most others would get in trouble for taking and publishing. Likewise some professional authors get away with writing stuff that most others would get in trouble for writing and publishing. It's a double standards issue.

Poppycock. It is a matter of what is pornography or not. There is a legitimate claim that some sensible items must be allowed to be discussed and explored. No matter how uncomfortable that might make some people.

 

[ozso]

No, not "the public". It is still just a vocal minority. And making a book available is not ramming anything down anyone's throat.

And the number of republican voters remained consistent from four years ago.

It's the lgbtqqip2saa+ school library books plus the lgbtqqip2saa+idiology kids are being taught in classrooms. And it's being stamped out because it's been taken way too far. That's what you're protesting, it being stamped out.

 

[Belk]

It's the lgbtqqip2saa+ school library books plus the lgbtqqip2saa+idiology kids are being taught in classrooms. And it's being stamped out because it's been taken way too far. That's what you're protesting, it being stamped out.

Nope. Public opinion is strongly in favor of gay rights and it is only a vocal minority who are hollering about books being made available. The same vocal minority that hollers about any thing pro lgbt.