Liste des Groupes | Revenir à rb tech |
On 4/17/2025 9:15 PM, AMuzi wrote:My point was merely that parents who wish their children to read materials unavailable in the local public or school library are perfectly free to acquire those books.On 4/17/2025 7:57 PM, zen cycle wrote:I remember conversations where you expressed support for removal of "prurient" materials. I don't recall you criticizing removal of reading materials in general, to the extent that you gave links for the purchase of used books for specific titles that were mentioned in this forum, which smacked of a rationalization (at best) of removing To Kill A Mockingbird was really no big deal since you could find it for $195 online. That isn't a condemnation of book banning in _my_ book.On 4/17/2025 8:17 PM, AMuzi wrote:>On 4/17/2025 6:05 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:>On 4/17/2025 6:01 PM, AMuzi wrote:>>>
On that subject, today brings some helpful and hopeful news:
>
https://apnews.com/article/rubio-disinformation- russia- china-iran- d53d00551a0a57f3114431c624db0b0f
>
Government censorship doesn't play well with me.
Hmm. So Vladimir gets to say anything he wants anytime he wants?
>
I guess that's handy if he's on your election team.
>
No one in USA controls what foreign heads of state say or don't say. Or could, if they so wished.
>
The Office of Disinformation was established to control US citizens' and or organizations' speech, a clear and blatant 1st Amendment violation.
>
yet we don't hear a peep from you about the government demanding library book bans in order to get gvt funding.
Which only indicates you are not paying attention.
>
I have consistently complained about it, excepting only prurient materials for minor children.
>
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.