Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil_liS
This is where we disagree. I don't see evidence in the article. It just said that Scroggins made a complaint last year because of religious reasons and the superintendent announced that 2 of the 3 books were banned because of the conclusion of the board where 3 out of 7 people were absent (for the whole year?). On the other hand, a person who gives the impression that they are employed by the high-school, talks about peoples jobs being threatened.
It's easy to google information. And if you do that, it actually seems like there is reason to believe the claims of the commenter (the article that I linked to before).
If you don't want to google things, let me help you:
The earliest complaint of Wesley Scroggins. that I could find on the subject. - May 2010
A 29 page manifesto - June 2010
A not-interview of Wesley Scroggins where if you pay attention you will hear the words "You mean the history of you not being able to get on the school board?" at 1:02. |
Okay! I was basing my statements on the evidence I had at hand, which was the article and comment alone. You have found additional evidence looks like it legitimizes the commenter. That's great! No problem with that whatsoever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
Ah, f-bombs and movie ratings. It all makes sense now. I assume they've instituted a procedure to remove all "R-rated books" from their curriculum/library in a timely manner, then? None of these things are reasons... nor are they valid. They are excuses and they are spin. I think Elfwreck put it best:
|
I could also quote
Iphinome, mldavis2, and
Hellmark here too (and apologies to Elfwreck for lack of embedded comments).
Now we are discussing the reason for the ban! That was my point from the beginning. If we don't discuss the
real reasons for the ban, we aren't eliciting any change.
-Pie