Posted on 09/14/2005 9:03:21 AM PDT by Stoat
Helping Planned Parenthood's abortion industry do a Joe Camel. Just helping to make new customers.
You prefer your children to read sex-filled trash, that's your right. Those of us who don't also have rights.
Move the goalposts much?
Child porn is not okay. But not everything is child porn.
"You prefer your children read sex-filled trash, that's your right. Those of us who don't also have rights"
Yes I see. You have the right to ban a book because YOU don't like it. Oh wait, NO YOU DON'T!
I believe you DO and I WOULD not allow our children to read these books. What I am saying is, don't become the stereotypical overreaching, book banning(or burning) monsters that the lib turds would just love us to become.
You don't want YOUR kid reading the book? Fine. Deal with the teacher on it. Don't start acting like you know what's best for the entire community because I guarantee you that you do not.
When did the bible become required reading in the 11th grade?
I guess you did but that happens when a person gets caught defending the indefensable.
Since post 17 I've said this is about child porn and I haven't changed my stand. If you want to defend this kind of porn, that's your business. My opinion won't change.
You don't have children... do you ?
Perhaps. But it kept me from reading "literature" for years.
No, but it includes children getting a father drunk to have an incestuous relationship.
Genesis 19:32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.
But why let facts get in the way of a good "holier than thou" rant.
Well which is it? You want the parent to teach the kid or the state? Don't look back to your own fondness for books with "homosexual implications." Just say whether or not you agree if a young child should be taught about oral sex in India.
> This woman needs to sit down and explain things sexual to her daughter (or perhaps have her daughter explain things to her).
The kid must have had the passage bookmarked. She should have had the sense in the first place not to let her mother find it.
I should have put a sarcasm tag on my posts. Sorry.
"Is Lolita trash?"
***
I don't think it's appropriate for high school children. I read it in college and felt uneasy about the sexual relationship therein. It was actually quite repulsive.
"LOLITA, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin. My soul."
Here the perv is talking about a twelve-year old girl.
< A knee jerk reaction... you have no idea the context of the passage, described as being "introduced to oral sex by her cousin going through puberty." >
Have you ever heard the phrase, "I was introduced to sex at the age of (insert an age)"? Just in case you don't know, it doesn't mean "that's when someone TOLD me about the birds and bees".
Sounds like a good movie plot.
I see. So you like child porn and think books containing such are permissable for HS students?
And I didn't bring up the Bible. Go talk to the one that did.
But it does help Make The World Safe For Democracy not to mention cleaning toxic waste dumps.
I guess you missed it.
The issue isn't that the 11th grader doesn't know about oral sex. The issue is that a book that's supposed to be about the history of India shouldn't be describing incidents of child molestation.
Nope. He just read it outside of the home.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.