>> "Again, AFAIK this is confined to primary education settings."
No.
>> "Not exactly a "free speech" issue."
It sure is.
>> 'That's probably the best of your suggestions, though is that really "The Elite War on Free Thought"?'
Trying to define elite is fraught, but I think someone who gets their words syndicated in a massive paid newsletter is a strong contender. I'm not sure someone in the muck is the best judge of who's in and who's out, so I reject the framing outright.
It is not beyond the pail, that I would not want my 8 year old kid reading about blood and guts. No-one would object to me saying keep StephenKing out of my 3'rd graders hand. No one would suggest it's book banning to do so.
It is not beyond the pail, that I would not want my 8 year old kid reading about Jesus. While people might object to removing references the that myth from my kids, I doubt anyone would consider it banning a book.
Why would it be up to me as a parent to determine what is presented to my child in those two cases, but not up to me in other cases. I am the parent, and that is where the argument stops. If I say books on topic X are not approved, then don't show my kid books on X.
Public libraries, actually.
>> "Again, AFAIK this is confined to primary education settings."
No.
>> "Not exactly a "free speech" issue."
It sure is.
>> 'That's probably the best of your suggestions, though is that really "The Elite War on Free Thought"?'
Trying to define elite is fraught, but I think someone who gets their words syndicated in a massive paid newsletter is a strong contender. I'm not sure someone in the muck is the best judge of who's in and who's out, so I reject the framing outright.