IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old Yesterday, 09:47 PM   #401
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 33,253
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
It doesn't need to specify violence or language, as the wording is vague enough for that to fall under the umbrella. Even so, the vast majority of the legislation has no specification one way or the other.

Also, I like the idea that the arguing point would be, "See it's only concerned with sexually-inappropriate material for children! Gotcha!" Awesome, just awesome.
Hold on a second. Only, it seems, a moment ago this legislation was needed because it's explicit, in black and white. Now suddenly its vagueness is a virtue?
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

"There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:49 PM   #402
Warp12
King of Kings
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 7,002
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Hold on a second. Only, it seems, a moment ago this legislation was needed because it's explicit, in black and white. Now suddenly its vagueness is a virtue?

I consider it so. Because I don't personally see matters of sexuality as the only area of concern for age-appropriate designation. As I am sure many parents would agree.

The explicit nature of the legislation is that it requires policy and procedures that are openly presented to the public.
__________________
Cancel my subscription to the resurrection.

Last edited by Warp12; Yesterday at 09:52 PM.
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:38 PM   #403
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,735
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
I consider it so. Because I don't personally see matters of sexuality as the only area of concern for age-appropriate designation. As I am sure many parents would agree.

The explicit nature of the legislation is that it requires policy and procedures that are openly presented to the public.
And as I said before, if you are concerned about such things it is the right of a parent to police what books your child reads.

But this gives such parents the right to police what ALL children are able to read. And that is censorship.

For all your complaints about 'grooming' you are advocating the exact same. You applaud a small group of parents determining what is normal for everyone by enforcing your morals on those that do not share them.
In a free country all people should have access to all books and then decide what they feel is moral based upon their own decisions.
But you do not wish a free country, you wish an authoritarian country where only those that agree with you get to make decisions.
Lukraak_Sisser is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:35 AM   #404
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 105,733
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
Oh, and since it was suggested that events such as "Drag Queen Story Hour" were not relevant to this legislation/discussion:




Seems to me that a Drag Queen Story Hour would fall under the umbrella of an event. And there has been legislation proposed in MO, previously, to address these sort of event-related concerns.
The reason I worded my response as I did was to see if you had read the proposed legislation, as can be seen you hadn't until just a few posts of your ago.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:46 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.