3 ms·
I understand that they are public institutions, but there is a crucial distinction. When you say "the government wants to ban arms/restrict free speech" I assum
by hdjjhhvvhga 4y ago
I understand that they are public institutions, but there is a crucial distinction. When you say "the government wants to ban arms/restrict free speech" I assume you mean the state or federal government wants to introduce a new law. Whereas in this case it was the parents who were concerned and asked relevant institutions. It doesn't matter if the books promote violence against minorities or LGBT+ themes, if parents of the kids feel uncomfortable with them and use a lawful process to limit their kids exposure to them in education, I find it quite an exaggeration to say that "the government does it." Or maybe it's become common usage to call local initiatives government, I don't know.
- maxsilver 4y agoI disagree, there's no meaningful distinction whatsoever. > I assume you mean the state or federal government wants to introduce a new law. Why? If it were any other issue, no one would care about the distinction. If Allegan County, Michigan banned firearms, people would still claim it's an infringement of 2nd Amendment rights, even though it's just "concerned parents asking relevant institutions at the local level" and not necessarily a state/federal law. But when that same exact county bans books and/or libraries instead, suddenly it "doesn't count" for some reason?
- ilyt 4y ago"Parents told government to ban books" is still government banning the books