Well get a load of what is going on in one Connecticut town... Suffield.
Hartford CourantBy Livi StanfordMarch 20, 2025A Connecticut town that has previously come under fire for reportedly attempting to censor LGBTQ+ content from its library is considering a policy that would control what content is allowed in the children’s and young adult sections, again targeting LGBTQ+ materials.Suffield’s Kent Memorial Library Commission Policy Subcommittee plans to discuss a proposed policy Thursday night that states that “materials and services presenting gender identity ideology are only permitted in the young adult section of the youth collection and only if balanced by other viewpoints regarding gender identity ideology directed to the same age group.”The policy goes on to prohibit sexually explicit content in the youth collection.
You know I think almost all people would agree about sexually explicit but the problem is that they also define two boy holding hands or two girls where one says to the other "I love you." as sexually explicit!
“It is alarming,” said Scott C. Jarzombek, president of the Connecticut Library Association. “This is beyond best practice. This is really people who do not have the library’s best interest at heart. It will surprise me if there is not a lawsuit. It is going to cost the taxpayers a lot of money.”[...]Further, she referred to another case interpreting the Supreme Court decision in Missouri in 2012.“In that case, the library installed a filter that specifically blacklisted websites expressing positive views toward the LGBTQ+ community,” she said. “The court noted that this filter systematically targeted positive LGBTQ+ informational sites as “sexual” in nature while assigning negative LGBTQ+ sites as “religious” in nature. This constituted viewpoint discrimination.”
It all boils down to is whose definition of sexually explicit. When you ban a whole community just because of who we are that's wrong! A friend was interviewed for the article and she said...
Melissa Combs, founder of the Out Accountability Project, which advocates for LGBTQ+ youth in education, said the KMLC’s “so called policy reads like a legal brief and aims to erase an entire community.“There are gender queer people living in Suffield,” she said. “The library is there to serve everyone in the community and not just one segment. This policy is discriminatory. It cherry picks medical literature, citing the Cass Review in defense of banning or relocating these books.”
Just think for a moment what it teaches the children... because according to the Republicans it is all about the children.
First it says to the LGBTQ+ children that it invalidation of their identity, it also isolates and shams them and it says that somehow they are "dirty" It denies them a community. While for straight children reinforces the idea that LGBT identities are something "other" or "taboo," it can create prejudices and misunderstandings. It limits those who want to understand who we are.
Then we have the head of the Family Institute of Connecticut said this at a pro-abortion rally...
“We know we are behind enemy lines in this state,” Peter Wolfgang said.
If that how he feels those who don't agree with him as... "the enemy" in militaristic terms? That doesn't sound very Christian of you.
When I asked ChatGPT the question "When you say that LGBT books should not be allowed in a library what message does it send to LGBT children and straight children" it said "This content may violate our usage policies." and rewrote the question to "When you say that LGBT books should not be allowed in a library, it can send several harmful messages to both LGBT children and straight children"
Meanwhile Perplexity had no problem with the question.
The rejection was very interesting... I guess that means ChatGPT censors its answers.
Update: 3/21 @ 4:30 AM
The meeting for the library was packed from the reports that I read...
"So many people showed up, it was a "fire hazard" and they had to cancel."
No comments:
Post a Comment