Leading scientists agree, you'll go blind.
You only go blind once but can enjoy masturbation thousands of times. In fact I'm enjoying whoa, who turned out the lights?
Actually when I first saw this book I thought it was inappropriate. "Dora explores her sexuality" by Dora the Explorer. Chapter One: What happened to Flashlight's batteries? Chapter Two: Look what's inside Backpack Chapter Three: Find the little man in the Canoe.
Just for clarity, there is a difference between banning the book, and removing it from the curriculum. The thread title is a little misleading.
viagra's side effects make me wonder if maybe there's something to that
Agreed. And I'll go further that put in historical context: there is nothing any school district can ever do to "ban" a book. Use of that word is inappropriate.
Just a redneck. Plenty in Prineville too.
But the term "book banning" is widely prevalent, even in the context of schools and school districts.
It seems this person is contradicting your assertion. Do we have a conflict of having definitions here?
How is the word 'ban" being used in these places, for instance?
Useful reading can be had in the USSC's decision in the Pico case. The decision was 5-4 against banning books in school libraries.
Here are the majority and minority opinions: http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/resources/handout1a.aspx?id=13965
Both groups, however, seem to agree that the school shouldn't remove books from the library for ideological reasons, if there isn't say, a public library in the neighborhood that carries said book.
So anyway, following the Pico case, school districts may not ban books from school libraries, but it appears to happen all the time, nevertheless (perhaps until challenged in court?).
In this case, there is no mention in the article linked to about removing the book from the library, only from classrooms and the curriculum. The word "banning" in the title is still misleading (Unless Ivan has further evidence)
Symantics aside, the fact that a single parent can cause such a wholesale change in a high school's curriculum is disturbing.
Even more disturbing is that the school didn't tell him to go **** himself.
This is what's wrong with education these days: parents have too much of a say and too many of them are mentally deficient in some way. My sister, a teacher, once had a parent come up to her and asked her to stop assigning reading and writing assignments. In an English class.
I did not disagree with this. The thing I was disagreeing with was Russ' statement that a school/school district can not even ban books. And even there, the conflict is only between the use of 'can' as opposed to 'may'.
A book may be banned from the curriculum. The error made by careless readers is to apply the word in a broader context.
But that would mean actually discussing the point of the thread.
...the point of the thread. I'm glad that you, Gokul, S&S, and Binzing, could keep up.
It was a committee!
What do you have against single parents?
This would be why so many people wear glasses?
And the committee agreed to allow it, but it was a non-binding decision.
Are you sure you are interpreting the Pico case correctly? In the second part of the majority opinion, it is stated:
Thus the case is only applicable if the Board were to remove the book from the library not the curriculum.
The committee agreed to allow 'it'? By 'it' do you mean removal or it's continued use in the classroom?
Separate names with a comma.