• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

SC House votes to cut funding to public university for homosexul literature

vash1012 said:
The merit of the program itself isn't really the issue here. The State isn't pulling funding because the idea of buying everyone in the freshman class one book is wasteful. They've been doing it for years with no complaints until they picked a book that a few people didn't like.

It is a mandatory class for some majors I believe, but not one you have to take that semester and it would have been a different book each semester if I understand it right.
Click to expand...

No the merit of the program is the issue. If only a select group of students need the book then why waste student tuition dollars to the tune of thousands to buy a book that not all students need? You didn't answer the question.

again sounds more like indoctrination than anything else. There are plenty of actually really good classic literture books that they could have picked. no the school picks a book that is more than controversial and has pronographic pictures in it.

Parents that are spending the money have the right to object and if officials felt that it was done on purpose they have a right to get their public funding back.
Politics stunts should not be rewarded with financial gain.

right is it a specific class for majors so why would you treat it differently than any other major? only students taking the class need the book not the whole entire campus.
 
ludin said:
No the merit of the program is the issue. If only a select group of students need the book then why waste student tuition dollars to the tune of thousands to buy a book that not all students need? You didn't answer the question.

again sounds more like indoctrination than anything else. There are plenty of actually really good classic literture books that they could have picked. no the school picks a book that is more than controversial and has pronographic pictures in it.

Parents that are spending the money have the right to object and if officials felt that it was done on purpose they have a right to get their public funding back.
Politics stunts should not be rewarded with financial gain.

right is it a specific class for majors so why would you treat it differently than any other major? only students taking the class need the book not the whole entire campus.
Click to expand...

I wonder why they didn't buy The Complete Works of Shakespeare for the kids. How about Mein Kampf? The Iliad? Jane Eyre? The House of Seven Gables? The Republic? 1984? There are literally thousands of books that are classic and timeless. Yet they choose one with graphic cartoons depciting sex between women, and people wonder why kids can't even name 15 US Presidents.

I wonder...did they hand out a copy of the Constitution to incoming freshmen too? Doubt it. But why educate on the Constitution when you can give them cartoons, right?
 
tres borrachos said:
Teaching a class on 50 Shades of Grey isn't the same thing as adults in a university handing out this book to all incoming freshmen. Understand the difference between an elective class and a requirement that the parents had no control over. And the fact that it's about gay women is irrelevant to me. I already said that. I don't want adults peddling graphic material to my kids even of heterosexual sex.

Why do you Liberals always think people are anti-gay?
Click to expand...

i don't know how you would even teach a class on 50 shades of grey. it is nothing more than a graphic s/m book. i wondered what all the hype about the book was so i read through like the first 12 chapters and then stopped i couldn't read anymore it was that bad.

it is amazing the switch that our society has taken. If it is wholesome, moral, and good in general it is frowned and scorned on. if it is smutty, filled with filth and everything else it is praised and uplifted. then hollywood wonders why all the religious movies that they are coming out with (exception of noah) is doing huge.

I think people are tired of garbage and want something wholesome and good.
 
ludin said:
i don't know how you would even teach a class on 50 shades of grey. it is nothing more than a graphic s/m book. i wondered what all the hype about the book was so i read through like the first 12 chapters and then stopped i couldn't read anymore it was that bad.

it is amazing the switch that our society has taken. If it is wholesome, moral, and good in general it is frowned and scorned on. if it is smutty, filled with filth and everything else it is praised and uplifted. then hollywood wonders why all the religious movies that they are coming out with (exception of noah) is doing huge.

I think people are tired of garbage and want something wholesome and good.
Click to expand...

I read 50 Shades and thought it was poorly written, and as you said, it's an S&M book. It's another book I don't want my kids reading until they are adults.

From the time they were little my kids read Shakespeare (we used to read it to them). They also have read our Constitution and do so each year. How much more applicable to their current and future lives is that document? Guess what? My kids get all As and Bs in school and can name all of the US Presidents. They can talk about the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, both World Wars, etc. They know about the interment of Japanese-Americans, they know about slavery, they know about the women's rights movement, they know about business, they know about geography, they know about geology. They know about the Big Bang, they know about astronomy. I wonder...should I feel like a bad parent because they can't talk with any degree of knowledge about lesbian sex acts and S&M?
 
Henrin said:
How is it small minded to say I will only pay for classes teaching subjects that I agree should be taught? One of the main problems with the government being involved in education is that it ignores what parents want their kids to learn in favor of what the government wants kids to learn.
Click to expand...

In what way is it NOT small minded?
 
tres borrachos said:
I wouldn't send my kids to religious schools because we are not a religious family, which I've said on here repeatedly. You fail.
Click to expand...

You seem to have more in common with religious institutions, so I don't see how I "fail" by my suggestion. It still stands.
 
tres borrachos said:
I'm small minded because I don't want adults handing out graphc pictures depicting sex to my children. I adore Liberal logic.

When you have your own kids, you can raise them as you see fit. I'm sure you can find other adults to give out graphic sex cartoons to your kids, and you can thump yourself on the chest when it happens that you have a big mind. Enjoy.
Click to expand...

That's part of my point. They are not kids any more and you are not raising them any more. I think it is bizarre that you think that you still are, especially to the extent that you think you are. Do they even know how to fly?
 
tres borrachos said:
Electing to take a class in pornography has nothing to do with the OP which stated that the college bought the material for all incoming freshmen and distributed said material to incoming freshman. That is not "elective".

Drawn breasts isn't the same thing as cartoons depicting women having sex with each other.

My kids...my money....my choice.
Click to expand...

At what age are you going to let your kids become adults or are you still gonna wipe their behinds for them when they're 30.
 
Carjosse said:
Well they are going to college, they are adults. There is a graphic novel that I own and so does my high school's library that depicts the same thing, but it is about coming of age, not about the sex. Not to mention it won numerous awards and had a film made about it. I wouldn't be surprised if the book is the one they are talking about.
Click to expand...

That would have been awesome when I was a freshman at college, especially considering I was 17 when I started. Not quite a legal adult, but distributing graphic sexual material to a minor is probably no big deal, huh?
 
vash1012 said:
Just because its not done at gun point or with the threat of jail doesn't mean its not censorship. It may be a backhanded version of it, but its still censorship. National Coalition Against Censorship, the ACLU of South Carolina, the American Association of University Professors, the Modern Language Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries, the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, the Association of American Publishers, the National Council of Teachers of English and the American Library Association all agree with that view since they wrote a letter to the South Carolina Finance Committee to that effect.

What you're saying is kind of like a gun control proponent saying "Oh, bans on assault rifles isn't an infringement on the right to bear arms. You clearly haven't been to Japan. That's infringement!".
Click to expand...

So any book the the state legislature isn't currently funding is being censored, according to you. Do you think they are funding every single book ever written except the one in the OP? Did the legislature pass a law banning the book, meaning it's now illegal to possess it?
 
Grand Mal said:
Really? The 'we're not as bad as those guys' argument?
The state needs to cut all funding to all universities or butt out of their business. Legislators aren't elected to make decisions about college curricula. They're not qualified and not mandated.
Click to expand...

They are elected to make funding decisions for the entire state, including state universities. It's kind of part of their jobs.
 
jimbo said:
You probably have a point concerning the Bible running afoul of the first, so I'll rephrase. What would be the reaction if any so called right wing agenda was forced on the freshmen and paid for by the state? Say, for example, a subscription to the American Rifleman. Would that work better for you?

I am against any agenda being forced on any captive audience and paid for with state money. That would include the Bible, the gay book, or any RW publication you care to name. In this case, I believe the state was correct in withholding funds.
Click to expand...

What would my reaction be if the State started cutting funding? The exact same. The issue here is the attempt by a State legislator to bully local universities into not speaking about topics they don't like simply because they don't like them and not because they are breaking any law.

When you are in college you are "forced" to read all kinds of things you won't agree with assuming you take a class. The philosophy of Nietzsche, The Double Helix, Mein Kampf, Karl Marx.. What if the State decides it doesn't want to pay any salaries for people who are Liberal so it cuts the funding of the school for exactly the amount of those salaries? Would that be right?

JUst to be clear, this isn't a State funded program. The State is just cutting the money from the pool that they give them for the same amount that the program cost to administer. The college is largely funded by tuition. The State not giving them this money does not mean that the program will just go away. They could easily cut something else instead.
 
Moon said:
They are elected to make funding decisions for the entire state, including state universities. It's kind of part of their jobs.
Click to expand...

Based on what?
 
vash1012 said:
What would my reaction be if the State started cutting funding? The exact same. The issue here is the attempt by a State legislator to bully local universities into not speaking about topics they don't like simply because they don't like them and not because they are breaking any law.

When you are in college you are "forced" to read all kinds of things you won't agree with assuming you take a class. The philosophy of Nietzsche, The Double Helix, Mein Kampf, Karl Marx.. What if the State decides it doesn't want to pay any salaries for people who are Liberal so it cuts the funding of the school for exactly the amount of those salaries? Would that be right?

JUst to be clear, this isn't a State funded program. The State is just cutting the money from the pool that they give them for the same amount that the program cost to administer. The college is largely funded by tuition. The State not giving them this money does not mean that the program will just go away. They could easily cut something else instead.
Click to expand...

all those classes are elective classes and you don't need the books unless you take the class.
the school doesn't purchase those books for all students at the begining of the year.

if this was a book for a specific class then there was no need to waste student dollars and state money buying it for every student.
 
tres borrachos said:
Someone has reading comprehension issues, I see. (You).

I'm not anti-gay, as I've posted repeatedly on here. I said I wouldn't want my children given graphic cartoons of heterosexual couples having sex either.
Click to expand...

Gay nudie pics, hetero nudie pics, whatever. What are you going to do, monitor their internet use for pornhub while they're at college as well? If I were you I'd be far more concerned about those credit card booths they set up outside every cafeteria in every university in the United States.
 
ludin said:
Umm that is their job to set a state budget? this isn't rocket science.
Click to expand...

Don't be obtuse. The question is, on what should they base their decisions about funding universities.

"This isn't rocket science." Ferchrisakes.
 
Grand Mal said:
Based on what?
Click to expand...

They're politicians, so they make funding decisions based on whatever criteria is important to them at the time. Do you really not know this?
 
Grand Mal said:
Don't be obtuse. The question is, on what should they base their decisions about funding universities.

"This isn't rocket science." Ferchrisakes.
Click to expand...

that wasn't the question you asked. so i am not being obtuse i answered the question you asked. if you meant a different question then you should have typed it.

they base funding on many things. in this case the state or someone in the state didn't think that they should be paying for books like this.
 
Cardinal said:
Gay nudie pics, hetero nudie pics, whatever. What are you going to do, monitor their internet use for pornhub while they're at college as well? If I were you I'd be far more concerned about those credit card booths they set up outside every cafeteria in every university in the United States.
Click to expand...

i don't think you are reading her posts. she has stated if they want to spend their money or there time whatever.
she doesn't want someone else handing it to them.

i don't think you would take to kindly if someone tried to give you kid a graphical novel depicting sex scene's. i know i wouldn't. more so when i am being charged for it.
hopefully by then i have raised my kids properly so that they know better.
 
jimbo said:
I read that the school purchased the book for every incoming freshman. Did all the freshmen elect to take that class? I would guess not.

My response? Try purchasing the Bible for every incoming freshman, and I would bet Carjosse would have a different opinion.

My opinion would stay the same. School has no business in the forced agenda business.
Click to expand...

Well from what I understand it is an introductory course, so I would say yes it is still appropriate otherwise I guess prospective students should only read childrens' books. Don't like it, don't go to the university or stop bitching.
 
ludin said:
i don't think you are reading her posts. she has stated if they want to spend their money or there time whatever.
she doesn't want someone else handing it to them.

i don't think you would take to kindly if someone tried to give you kid a graphical novel depicting sex scene's. i know i wouldn't. more so when i am being charged for it.
hopefully by then i have raised my kids properly so that they know better.
Click to expand...

I'm reading her posts, and she can't control what people "hand them." I'm not saying she can't have an opinion about it, just that compared to concrete threats a graphic novel rates at the bottom.

If I've raised my kids to college-going age and they can't react maturely to people handing them sexually graphic literature then I've done something wrong. One thing that kids of that age definitely need a strong talking to about is those damn credit card booths. Seriously, those things are a menace.
 
Moon said:
That would have been awesome when I was a freshman at college, especially considering I was 17 when I started. Not quite a legal adult, but distributing graphic sexual material to a minor is probably no big deal, huh?
Click to expand...

No it really isn't and it isn't graphic either. Hell the movie is rated 16+ in Quebec and France. If by 17 you cannot handle sex in books in a mature manner, there is something wrong.
 
ludin said:
that wasn't the question you asked. so i am not being obtuse i answered the question you asked. if you meant a different question then you should have typed it.
Click to expand...

I highlighted 'funding decisions' and asked, "Based on what?"

ludin said:
they base funding on many things. in this case the state or someone in the state didn't think that they should be paying for books like this.
Click to expand...

A legislator who bases funding decisions on personal prejudices is stepping outside his job description. If you've decided to fund a university, write the cheque and be done with it. If you don't like what they do with the money, stop the funding. Don't presume to tell university administrators how they should do their jobs. What's next, cutting the funding that's spent on science texts that don't teach a creation myth?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom