Roberto Clemente Banned in Florida

G1911 · #1 02-12-2023, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

Did the state remove the Jackie book or not? That is the subject of the post. The report also came from Penguin, the publisher of the books removed.

They did not. This report is saying the school district did. The district says these books were never in its system at all (https://www.news4jax.com/entertainme...er-on-shelves/). �After requesting more information about the report from the district, a DCPS spokeswoman told News4JAX Tuesday afternoon there are nearly 200 books being reviewed by the district but none of them were challenged by members of the community and the books were never on the library shelves.� So they weren�t in the library at all, and they haven�t been banned by the district.

This claim that these books were banned appears to be completely false. Furthermore, anyone who has read the short law would know that such books are not banned from school libraries whatsoever, and that the law very explicitly requires the achievements of and problems experienced by African Americans to be taught to children. This is just fake rage bait for people who are unable or unwilling to to put even 1 minute into checking if it�s true, or reading the law.

Peter_Spaeth · #2 02-12-2023, 10:58 AM

The law does say critical race theory cannot be taught, n'est-ce pas?

G1911 · #3 02-12-2023, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The law does say critical race theory cannot be taught, n'est-ce pas?

No. "Critical" and "theory" are two more words that never appear in the law in any context whatsoever.

The bill is less than 4,000 words. If one does not want to read all of it, 51-78 are a good general summation of what it does not allow.

The talking points of right or left do not equal actual reality.

packs · #4 02-12-2023, 11:04 AM

The updated Pen letter includes a disclaimer that says they are looking into the precise details of why, when, and for how long the books were removed. I don�t see any challenges to them being removed for a period of time.

G1911 · #5 02-12-2023, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

The updated Pen letter includes a disclaimer that says they are looking into the precise details of why, when, and for how long the books were removed. I don�t see any challenges to them being removed for a period of time.

How is it possible to remove a book that wasn�t in the library in the first place?

Peter_Spaeth · #6 02-12-2023, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

No. "Critical" and "theory" are two more words that never appear in the law in any context whatsoever.

The bill is less than 4,000 words. If one does not want to read all of it, 51-78 are a good general summation of what it does not allow.

The talking points of right or left do not equal actual reality.

I've read it. It bans it in so many words and that is obviously how it is understood including by the court that struck it down as unconstitutional as applied to universities.

G1911 · #7 02-12-2023, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I've read it. It bans it in so many words and that is obviously how it is understood including by the court that struck it down as unconstitutional as applied to universities.

I would love to see what line(s) in the bill, which explicitly requires teaching African American history and achievement, ban Jackie Robinson books.

Whether it is a good bill or not, I am not so sure. But the claims made appear to be contradictory to the text and to the evidence of what has actually happened.

Peter_Spaeth · #8 02-12-2023, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

I would love to see what line(s) in the bill, which explicitly requires teaching African American history and achievement, ban Jackie Robinson books.

Whether it is a good bill or not, I am not so sure. But the claims made appear to be contradictory to the text and to the evidence of what has actually happened.

You just moved the goalposts of the discussion I was talking about critical race theory.

G1911 · #9 02-12-2023, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You just moved the goalposts of the discussion I was talking about critical race theory.

Hm. The books the thread is about seems to be the topic, but alright. We'll pretend it's not. 'Critical Race Theory' is not in the bill, and is a rather vague term used on the right. I'm not exactly a supporter of the bill, I've simply read it and can see that the media accounts are in complete opposition to the actual text.

Here's 51-83 with what it actually doesn't allow instruction of. What part do you think is a problem and want to debate instead of the books that it obviously doesn't ban?

51. 1. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin are
52 morally superior to members of another race, color, sex, or
53 national origin.
54 2. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
55 or national origin, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive,
56 whether consciously or unconsciously.
57 3. An individual�s moral character or status as either
58 privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by his or her
59 race, color, sex, or national origin.
60 4. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin
61 cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to
62 race, color, sex, or national origin.
63 5. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
64 or national origin, bears responsibility for, or should be
65 discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of,
66 actions committed in the past by other members of the same race,
67 color, sex, or national origin.
68 6. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
69 or national origin, should be discriminated against or receive
70 adverse treatment to achieve diversity, equity, or inclusion.
71 7. An individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or
72 any other form of psychological distress on account of his or
73 her race, color, sex, or national origin.
74 8. Such virtues as merit, excellence, hard work, fairness,
75 neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness are racist or
76 sexist, or were created by members of a particular race, color,
77 sex, or national origin to oppress members of another race,
78 color, sex, or national origin.
79 (b) Paragraph (a) may not be construed to prohibit
80 discussion of the concepts listed therein as part of a course of
81 training or instruction, provided such training or instruction
82 is given in an objective manner without endorsement of the
83 concepts.

Carter08 · #10 02-14-2023, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I've read it. It bans it in so many words and that is obviously how it is understood including by the court that struck it down as unconstitutional as applied to universities.

Exactly.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Roberto Clemente Banned in Florida	BobC	WaterCooler Talk- Off Topics	1	02-13-2023 02:03 PM
Sold: 1993 Florida Marlins Inaugural Yr Team Signed Official Florida Marlins Baseball	greenmonster66	Autographs & Game Used B/S/T	5	06-23-2021 12:07 PM
WTB: Roberto Clemente PSA 7/8's	fuzzybub	1960-1979 Baseball Cards B/S/T	1	02-06-2016 07:29 PM
FS: Roberto Clemente PSA 5's 56,67,70	bigfanNY	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	2	05-14-2015 10:48 PM
FS: 1962 Roberto Clemente PSA 6 1966 Clemente PSA 6	Mphilking	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	0	06-26-2010 12:41 PM