Bible banned in Davis school libraries. Book of Mormon next?

[provoman]

"And notwithstanding this great abomination of the Lamanites, it doth not exceed that of our people in Moriantum. For behold, many of the daughters of the Lamanites have they taken prisoners; and after depriving them of that which was most dear and precious above all things, which is chastity and virtue—"

 

The State lameslatures passed a law that automatically banned the Book of Mormon from Utah school.

 

This is part of the "book ban law" in Utah:  'sexual immorality ... has no serious value for minors.'

Moroni described sexual immorality of the people. The law also defines "minor" as anyone under 18 years of age.

By virtue of the State Legislature, the Bible or Book of Mormon have no "serious value" to anyone under 18 years of age.

It is almost as if the sponsors and drafters were so singularly focused that they could not see the forrest

[bluebell]

And just like that, the Bible is back in.

https://kutv.com/news/crisis-in-the-classroom/davis-school-district-reverses-decision-allows-bible-to-stay-on-library-shelves-unanimous-vote-king-james-version-vulgarity-or-violence?utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&sfmc_id=231039&utm_guid=8d81e4a9-b449-48cd-abe8-64d3e6e65cb4&utm_campaign=

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, bluebell said:

And just like that, the Bible is back in.

https://kutv.com/news/crisis-in-the-classroom/davis-school-district-reverses-decision-allows-bible-to-stay-on-library-shelves-unanimous-vote-king-james-version-vulgarity-or-violence?utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&sfmc_id=231039&utm_guid=8d81e4a9-b449-48cd-abe8-64d3e6e65cb4&utm_campaign=

Shocking no one…

[JAHS]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

And just like that, the Bible is back in.

https://kutv.com/news/crisis-in-the-classroom/davis-school-district-reverses-decision-allows-bible-to-stay-on-library-shelves-unanimous-vote-king-james-version-vulgarity-or-violence?utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&sfmc_id=231039&utm_guid=8d81e4a9-b449-48cd-abe8-64d3e6e65cb4&utm_campaign=

Well maybe for a while it inspired kids everywhere to start reading the Bible.😉

[provoman]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

Shocking no one…

The shock to me is that the State and Davis District are saying sex with prostitute(s), sodomy, incest, adultery are not indecent or immoral.

Even more shocking, is by law "sexual immorality" has no serious value to minors.

So for the State or the School Board to claim that the immorality in the Bible was not intended to included just manifests a double-standard and/or abuse of position to push their point of view agenda.

[Calm]

7 minutes ago, provoman said:

The shock to me is that the State and Davis District are saying sex with prostitute(s), sodomy, incest, adultery are not indecent or immoral.

Even more shocking, is by law "sexual immorality" has no serious value to minors.

So for the State or the School Board to claim that the immorality in the Bible was not intended to included just manifests a double-standard and/or abuse of position to push their point of view agenda.

Yep.

I think it is pretty clear that what matters most are the feelings about the work and not the specific content.

[The Nehor]

8 hours ago, bluebell said:

And just like that, the Bible is back in.

https://kutv.com/news/crisis-in-the-classroom/davis-school-district-reverses-decision-allows-bible-to-stay-on-library-shelves-unanimous-vote-king-james-version-vulgarity-or-violence?utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&sfmc_id=231039&utm_guid=8d81e4a9-b449-48cd-abe8-64d3e6e65cb4&utm_campaign=

I’m shocked. Seriously, this is my shocked face.

[bluebell]

12 hours ago, provoman said:

The shock to me is that the State and Davis District are saying sex with prostitute(s), sodomy, incest, adultery are not indecent or immoral.

Even more shocking, is by law "sexual immorality" has no serious value to minors.

So for the State or the School Board to claim that the immorality in the Bible was not intended to included just manifests a double-standard and/or abuse of position to push their point of view agenda.

If I had to guess (and I do), I'd say that the Board justifies it because the Bible teaches that those things are wrong.  It presents them in "real life" situations but then specifically teaches against them.  I'd assume that that is how the Board claims the bible is both moral and decent despite having those things in its pages.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

If I had to guess (and I do), I'd say that the Board justifies it because the Bible teaches that those things are wrong.  It presents them in "real life" situations but then specifically teaches against them.  I'd assume that that is how the Board claims the bible is both moral and decent despite having those things in its pages.

So we just write in one line at the end of every banned book that says: “And then God sent them all to hell” and they are all good. Okay, problem solved.

[provoman]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

If I had to guess (and I do), I'd say that the Board justifies it because the Bible teaches that those things are wrong.  It presents them in "real life" situations but then specifically teaches against them.  I'd assume that that is how the Board claims the bible is both moral and decent despite having those things in its pages.

I could see people taking that route. But the way the Legislature wrote the law, the outcome can only Yes or No for any material that contains "sexual immorality". 

76-10-1227

[The Nehor]

Just now, provoman said:

I could see people taking that route. But the way the Legislature wrote the law, the outcome can only Yes or No for any material that contains "sexual immorality". 

76-10-1227

Unequal application of the law? In these United States?

Impossible!

[provoman]

46 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Unequal application of the law? In these United States?

Impossible!

Never!

 

HB374 was just so poorly written OR it was not poorly written and the Legislature did not think it through.

[Calm]

41 minutes ago, provoman said:

Never!

 

HB374 was just so poorly written OR it was not poorly written and the Legislature did not think it through.

Or it was poorly written AND the Legislature did not think it through.

[california boy]

I heard an interview on NPR this morning about a book club on a high school campus.  They have chosen as a club to read all the books that their school district bans.  Part of the reason why they decided to form this group is because those books that are banned are the exact books they should be reading.  

On the same program was the author of "All Boys Aren't Blue".  It is one of the top 10 books in the country right now.  This is a summary of the book.

Quote

All Boys Aren’t Blue: A Memoir-Manifesto (2020) is a young adult memoir written by activist George M. Johnson about their experience growing up Black and queer. The chapters are collected in four acts (referred to as “parts” in this guide). Each chapter is a self-contained essay; the memoir progresses through Johnson’s life from childhood to college graduation. Two letters addressed to their mother and brother appear alongside the chapters.

 

The whole premise of the book is what it is like as a teen to grow up queer and feel like an outsider.  What books that are approved would help a kid like that? He wrote it specifically for teenagers dealing with those issues.  To take out books simply because they deal with queer issues may very well be something parents want out of the library, but they are exactly the books a teen needs to help him deal with how to navigate something that those very parents may not be helping him with.

Do parents have a right to monitor what their children read?  Absolutely.  Do a few parents have a right to dictate what other parents children read? Absolutely not.  

[provoman]

The way the law was written, it seems clear it was written for a busy bodies who want nothing more than to use the power of the State to impose their world view. The review and appeals panel is supposed to include - parents that are representative of the student body.