Summary
Rightwing groups across the US are driving a wave of legislation to restrict books in school and public libraries, targeting content deemed “sexually explicit” or “obscene,” often affecting LGBTQ+ and race-related titles.
Texas leads with 31 bills and 538 book bans in the 2023–24 school year.
Proposed laws, like Texas Senate Bill 13, shift book selection power from librarians to parent-led advisory boards.
Critics, including librarians and legal scholars, warn these efforts amount to censorship, risk violating First Amendment rights, and reduce access in underserved communities.
I heard there’s one book in there that talks about a pair of sisters who get their father drunk so they can take turns raping him. Are they banning that one?
wow, the bible is fucked up.
You have to go pretty far into the Bible to even get to the first non-incestuous relationship.
The Bible doesn’t portray it as a good thing, and considers their descendants cursed.
A large portion of the Bible is: “here’s all the ways people can be nasty, don’t be like them”.
edit: I seem to have missed the context of book bannings…
But do you know what it does portray as a good thing? Slavery!
I mean, it’s a 1000 year old book. Slavery was accepted and normal in those days.
Slavery has never been acceptable, and I would expect a “holy book” meant to be a model for morality, regardless of when it is written, to at the very least be ambivalent on the topic of owning other humans as property.
Actually, that’s too generous. If I were to follow the teachings of a book, it would need to be explicitly anti-slavery. Something that would be particularly important in a time where slavery is “accepted and normal.” And really, a super fucking low bar.
We’ve got 10 commandments. At least 2 of them are about Yahweh being jealous of other gods, and yet none of them are about slavery.
Jesus could have easily said, “don’t own people as property,” and yet he didn’t.
No, he actually specifically outlined rules for owning and punishing your slaves. He (more than, imo) tacitly approves of slavery.
If you want to have this argument, you’re gonna lose.
Slavery has never been acceptable, and I would expect
a “holy book”the Constitution of the United States meant to be a model formoralitygovernment, regardless of when it is written, to at the very least be ambivalent on the topic of owning other humans as property.Slavery was very much and accepted socio economical practice in those days. The mentioning the bible does are often not reminiscent of the 18th century slavery we’re all familiar with. Slavery I’m those days was often a kind of servitude, for a couple years, tto pay off debt. The bible recognises that for what it is and tries to humanise slavery by saying things like to treat your slaves as your brother
You should probably take a step back and realize you’re defending slavery. That’s gross. You should be ashamed.
You can try to justify it all you want, but the fact is that it was just as unacceptable then as it is now, and an all-knowing, all-caring god should understand that no problem.
Regardless of the socio- economic conditions.
And yeah, it’s not like Jesus was well known for upsetting the socio-economic status quo or anything… It’s not like he fashioned his own whip to drive money changers from the temple.
B b b but money changing in the temple was the accepted practice in those days!
Also no. It allowed servitude to pay off debts, but all debts were supposed to be forgiven after 7 years, and so it was strictly limited.
Where do you think the ideas that all humans are equal and deserve equal rights that reduced slavery in modern times come from?
It allowed servitude to pay off debts
so, debt slavery?
Where do you think the ideas that all humans are equal and deserve equal rights that reduced slavery in modern times come from?
Definitely not the Bible, which tells women to be subservient to their husbands and enslaved people to obey their masters. I am utterly uninterested in the moral lessons of a book written by people who endorse debt slavery. Which, I guess still needs to be pointed out, is bad! Even if it’s “only” 7 years!
I understand your position, but I respectfully urge you to study more history, all modern western ideas of universal human rights are based on or heavily influenced by the Bible. Dominion by Tom Holland, despite the terrible name, is a good source on the subject.
Also, sure, we are partially past it, but considering that until 300 years ago almost everybody considered slavery a natural right, a 3000 years old law limiting servitude to 7 years is VERY progressive.
You are not convincing my queer trans ass there is anything worth studying in there to guide people morally. I had that inflicted on me for the first two decades of my life and literally have PTSD from it.
The history can be interesting, and it’s something people accomplished in spite of what is in that book, not because of it.
Abraham had sex with his (wife’s) slave Hagar to produce Ishmael – and both Hagar and Ishmael were then exiled after Abraham was able to conceive with his wife and produce Isaac.
Certainly not the kind of values I’d want for my family.
Also treated by the Bible as something bad.
Can you point to the verse that condemns that behavior?
They need to just get on with it, we all know what they want to do
Shit or get off the pot
deleted by creator
Conservatives simply hate free speech.
No no, they love free speech when it allows them to use hate speech against others. They only hate free speech when others opinions disagrees with their own. That is the difference between left and right, left understand that free speech means we have to protect against hate speech, the right rails against censorship regarding hate speech as a vehicle against “oppression” so they can be the ones that can attack those that disagree with them with hate speech.
“Free speech” is I get to call you the F-slur. “Obscenity” is you discussing any aspect of your life that differs from mine.
deleted by creator
Give them time, I’m sure we’ll have a China-style Great Firewall soon enough.
guns
