╌>

House Republicans pass Parents Bill of Rights

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  vic-eldred  •  last year  •  74 comments

By:   Lexi Lonas and Mychael Schnell (The Hill)

House Republicans pass Parents Bill of Rights
House Republicans passed an education bill on Friday that emphasizes parental rights in the classroom, leaning into a hot-button, culture war issue that has gained popularity in GOP politics across the country. The legislation, titled the Parents Bill of Rights, passed in a 213-208 vote, and it now heads to the Senate for consideration. It is…

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



House Republicans passed an education bill on Friday that emphasizes parental rights in the classroom, leaning into a hot-button, culture war issue that has gained popularity in GOP politics across the country.

The legislation, titled the Parents Bill of Rights, passed in a 213-208 vote, and it now heads to the Senate for consideration. It is highly unlikely, however, that the Democratic-controlled chamber will take up the measure, with House Democrats dubbing the bill the "Politics over Parents Act."

Republican Reps. Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Ken Buck (Colo.), Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Mike Lawler (N.Y.) and Matt Rosendale (Mont.) sided with all voting Democrats in opposing the measure.

The measure would require schools to publish their curricula publicly, mandate that parents be allowed to meet with their children's teachers and make schools give information to parents when violence occurs on school grounds.

It would also demand that parents receive a list of books and reading materials accessible at the school library and give parents a say when schools are crafting or updating their policies and procedures for student privacy, among other tenets.

At a time when Republicans have accused Democrats of painting parents as a threat and in the wake of contentious school board meetings around the country, the legislation also says school and government officials "should never seek to use law enforcement to criminalize the lawfully expressed concerns of parents about their children's education," and that the "First Amendment guarantees parents and other stakeholders the right to assemble and express their opinions on decisions affecting their children and communities."

"This bill is not complex or complicated," the bill's sponsor Rep. Julia Letlow (R-La.) said during debate on the House floor Thursday. "Nor should it be partisan or polarizing, and contrary to what you may hear from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, it is not an attack on our hard-working teachers, who will always be the heroes in my eyes."

"It is not an attempt to have Congress dictate their curriculum or determine the books in the library," she continued. "Instead, this bill aims to bring more transparency and accountability to education, allowing parents to be informed and when they have questions and concerns to lawfully bring them to their local school boards."

The chamber also approved a number of amendments to the bill, including one sponsored by Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) that says parents have a right to know if the school their child attends operates, sponsors or facilitates athletic programs or activities that allow transgender individuals to participate in a sport that does not correspond with their biological sex.

Another approved amendment, also sponsored by Boebert, says parents have a right to know if their child's school allows a transgender individual to use a bathroom or changing room that does not correspond with their biological sex.

Letlow first introduced the legislation in 2021, when education emerged as a controversial issue amid protests at school board meetings that railed against COVID-19 restrictions, curricula and books pertaining to gender and sexuality, and diversity and inclusion initiatives. She proposed the measure after Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) won his race on a platform that emphasized education and parental rights, making him the first Republican to win a statewide election in the Old Dominion in more than a decade.

The measure, however, did not receive a vote in the Democratic-controlled House during the last Congress, leading Letlow to reintroduce it at the beginning of March. House Republicans during the 2022 campaign cycle vowed to advance the legislation if they were to win the majority that November.

Although the bill is unlikely to get attention in the Democratic-controlled Senate, the House vote on the measure will almost certainly be used by Republicans to fuel attacks against Democrats on education, which has become an issue of heightened importance heading into the 2024 election cycle. Republicans have sought to paint Democrats as working to cut parents out of their children's education.

House Democrats this week argued the GOP's bill does not give parents any new rights in education and that it could make it easier for books to be banned in schools.

More than 1,600 books were banned in schools and libraries during the 2021-2022 school year, according to a report from PEN America, with the majority of the prohibitions occurring in Texas and Florida. A number of the books banned included LGBTQ themes and addressed issues of race and racism.

"This legislation has nothing to do with parental involvement, parental engagement," House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said on the House floor Thursday. "Parental empowerment has everything to do with jamming the extreme MAGA Republican ideology down the throats of the children and the parents of the United States of America."

"I think what we're seeing here today is the Republicans' attempt, Republican Party's attempt, to take some of the most heinous legislation that we are seeing passed on the state level to attack our trans and LGBT as well as people from marginalized communities right to exist in schools," Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said during Thursday's debate.

Republicans, however, pushed back on the idea that this bill will ban books. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), the chairwoman for the House Committee on Education, noted on a number of occasions that the legislation mentions nothing about banning books.

"The context here matters that we're talking about legislation in this body to just ensure that parents know what's in the libraries and what's in the curriculum," Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said. "It does nothing more."

"Yet, that's the great offense, but in trying to perpetuate this myth about federal perpetuation of so-called book banning — and let me be clear, yes, some local jurisdictions removing certain books, absolutely, and God bless them for it," he added. "Books about explicit sex acts. Let that hang over the chamber."

Democrats also highlighted their support for student-parent engagement, but said they don't believe the legislation does anything to promote it.

"First, let me be clear, the House Democrats believe parental engagement is central to student success," said Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.), the ranking member of the Committee on Education and Workforce. "Parental engagement is, in schools is closely linked to better student behavior, higher academic achievement and enhanced social skills, but, unfortunately, the Politics over Parents act does not take meaningful steps to increase or support parental engagement."

"Congress has a constitutional authority to write laws. What a mockery and betrayal of that duty it would be to pass this stunt of a bill that doesn't address a single priority of parents, bans books, undermines teachers and hurts our kids, Democrats are the party of parents and families," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    last year


It won't pass the Senate, nor the radical WH, but make democrats vote on it now and bring it back when Republicans have total control.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    last year
bring it back when Republicans have total control

cool. so not in our lifetimes then ...

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
1.2  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    last year

Oh dear, Republican Reps. Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Ken Buck (Colo.), Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Mike Lawler (N.Y.) and Matt Rosendale (Mont.) are WH radicals?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2.1  devangelical  replied to  Hallux @1.2    last year

more posturing by the maga faction that will ultimately bring ruin to the GOP at the polls, but watching the ongoing demolition derby inside the GOP is pretty entertaining ...

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2  Jeremy Retired in NC    last year

Another article I read stated that not a single Democrat voted for this and cried it's passing was "fascism at work".  Good to see the Democrats stood by their predatory mindset against children.

God forbid a parent have a say in what their children are being taught in school.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.1  Snuffy  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2    last year

You know it's really good that we have those who will explain what fascism is.  Hard to believe that limiting government power in favor of individual rights is fascism.  I would never have known that without the  help of our leftist friends here...

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  Snuffy @2.1    last year

sad so many continually misuse and abuse the word.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.1.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.1    last year

And it's the same idiots who call everything racist (another misued and abused word).

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
2.1.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Snuffy @2.1    last year
You know it's really good that we have those who will explain what fascism is.

It's like they are giving away thier game plan.  

Hard to believe that limiting government power in favor of individual rights is fascism.

Well it is denying the government the ability to do what they want.  

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Professor Silent
2.2  SteevieGee  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2    last year
God forbid a parent have a say in what their children are being taught in school.

We Republicans will scour all the books in the library and tell you which ones should be banned so you don't have to do anything.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  SteevieGee @2.2    last year

Library books and what is being taught in classrooms are two distinct things.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
4  Ronin2    last year

Why don't Democrats just open up reeducation centers and indoctrination camps? That is what their ultimate goal is. Question their doctrines and you will be reprogramed- or deleted- whichever occurs first. 

They want to turn the US into the DNCP.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
5  Drinker of the Wry    last year

Books liberals have worked to ban from libraries:

  • Huck Finn
  • Of Mice and Men
  • To Kill a Mockingbird
  • Dr Seuss
  • Harry Potter
 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1  Tessylo  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5    last year

That's a lie

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
5.1.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @5.1    last year

No, you must not be reading the news.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
5.1.2  Snuffy  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5.1.1    last year

Some never do.  Some argue just to argue.  And some think their post count gets them a cookie.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @5.1.2    last year

Like you snuffy?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5.1.1    last year

It's not Liberals who are banning books.  It's republikkkans.

Liberal/Democrat = Truth/Reality

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
5.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5    last year
Books liberals have worked to ban from libraries:
  • Huck Finn
  • Of Mice and Men
  • To Kill a Mockingbird
  • Dr Seuss
  • Harry Potter

Yep.................

And liberal parents have lobbied for books such as “ To Kill a Mockingbird ” by Harper Lee and “ Of Mice and Men ” by John Steinbeck  to be banned , for reasons such as racist slurs and “white savior” characters.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
5.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5    last year

And they are stupid enough to call those who fought that fascists.  Or dumb enough lit lie about the whole thing like in 5.1.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
5.3.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.3    last year
Or dumb enough lit lie about the whole thing like in 5.1 .

I attribute it more to ignorants than a lie.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Professor Silent
5.4  SteevieGee  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5    last year

I'm a fan of all those books.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
6  Sean Treacy    last year

Why is transparency so dangerous to Democrats? 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
6.1  Ronin2  replied to  Sean Treacy @6    last year

Because they haven't gained enough political control yet to come out and directly open up indoctrination and reeducation centers. 

Public schools are the closet thing they have; and they don't want to lose control of them. Informed parents are dangerous parents to Democrat doctrine.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
7  cjcold    last year

Why teachers are retiring in droves.

Ignorant, radical right high school dropouts should have no say in school board policy.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @7    last year

exactly right.

after all, why should parents be involved in any way in their kids education.

isn't that the government's job?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
7.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @7    last year
Why teachers are retiring in droves.

Are they only retiring in droves in red areas?  

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
7.3  bugsy  replied to  cjcold @7    last year

You do realize that in most cases, property taxes pay for schools with some help from the federal government. There should be a hierarchy in which parents have the most say.

Those that actually pay into the system through property taxes should get the most say, those that rely on government handouts gets the least.

Now, before leftists get all triggered, that was sarcasm, however, because citizens of a town, city, state, etc, pay taxes that go toward the schools and the WAGES of teachers, absolutely, parents should have a say in what is taught.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
7.4  Greg Jones  replied to  cjcold @7    last year
"Ignorant, radical right high school dropouts should have no say in school board policy".

They may be ignorant, but it's not the right wingers who are dropping out. The ones dropping out and getting the worst test scores are minority kids.

 Parents should have large voice as to what their children are being taught. And more and more of them are demanding it, and it's not just right wing parents.

 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.5  Tessylo  replied to  cjcold @7    last year

And they say it's Liberals banning books.

They lie.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8  Texan1211    last year

Is it any surprise liberals don't support parental rights?

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
9  mocowgirl    last year

When did most children ever read a book unless they were forced to?  

So how in the Hell do most parents even know what is in the book until someone with a political agenda tells them that the book is "bad" in some way?

ALL of the parents, who want to ban a book, should have to read the book and submit a comprehensive book report on the entire book and how it negatively impacted their own life by having to read the book themselves.  If the negative impact results in PTSD, then the victim should be referred to the appropriate mental care facility for evaluation and treatment.

If the parents can't read and understand a book, I have sincere doubts that their children will either.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
9.1  Snuffy  replied to  mocowgirl @9    last year

I know several children who are voracious readers, I was also as a child (a trait I continue to this day).  Not all conservatives are trying to ban books just like not all liberals are.  While there are plenty of followers who will shout out whatever their "leaders" tell them too, some people do actually read a book before they like or dislike it.  Part of the issue however is the interpretation of the book which can vary from person to person because a book interpretation is partially based on feelings also.  There have been all sorts of books that have been decried and banned from people from all walks of life.

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
9.1.1  mocowgirl  replied to  Snuffy @9.1    last year
There have been all sorts of books that have been decried and banned from people from all walks of life.

No argument that it has happened.  What are the reasons that access to knowledge should be suppressed today in public schools?

Men (at the top of religious hierarchy) and their followers, may be among the worst offenders of suppressing any education that threatened their control of the masses.  

Bannings and Burnings in History - Freedom to Read

Bannings and Burnings in History

Some of the most controversial books in history are now regarded as classics. The Bible and works by Shakespeare are among those that have been banned over the past two thousand years. Here is a selective timeline of book bannings, burnings, and other censorship activities.

1720:   Robinson Crusoe   by Daniel Defoe was placed on the   Index   Librorum   by the Spanish Catholic Church.

1616–42:  Galileo’s theories about the solar system and his support of the discoveries of Copernicus were condemned by the Catholic Church. Under threat of torture, and sentenced to jail at the age of 70, the great scientist was forced to renounce what he knew to be true. On his death, his widow agreed to destroy some of his manuscripts.

1624:  Martin Luther’s German translation of the Bible was burnt in Germany by order of the Pope.

1614:  Sir Walter Raleigh’s book  The History of the World  was banned by King James I of England for “being too saucy in censuring princes.”

1597:  The original version of Shakespeare’s  Richard II  contained a scene in which the king was deposed from his throne. Queen Elizabeth I was so angry that she ordered the scene removed from all copies of the play.

1559:  For hundreds of years, the Roman Catholic Church listed books that were prohibited to its members; but in this year, Pope Paul IV established the  Index   Librorum   Prohibitorum . For more than 400 years this was the definitive list of books that Roman Catholics were told not to read. It was one of the most powerful censorship tools in the world.

1524–26:  Thousands of copies of William Tyndale’s English translation of the New Testament were printed in Germany and smuggled into England, where they were publicly burned in 1526 on the orders of London’s Roman Catholic bishop. Church authorities in England insisted that the Bible would be available only in Latin and that only they would be able to read and interpret it. In 1536, as a result of a plot masterminded by the English, Tyndale was arrested in Belgium, tried for heresy, and strangled and burned at the stake near Brussels. A few of his translations were burned with him. Today, only three original copies of Tyndale’s New Testament survive.

1497–98:  Savonarola, a Florentine religious fanatic with a large following, was one of the most notorious and powerful of all censors. In these years, he instigated great “bonfires of the vanities” which destroyed books and paintings by some of the greatest artists of Florence. He persuaded the artists themselves to bring their works—including drawings of nudes—to the bonfires. Some poets decided they should no longer write in verse because they were persuaded that their lines were wicked and impure. Popular songs were denounced, and some were turned into hymns with new pious lyrics. Ironically, in May of 1498 another great bonfire was lit—this time under Savonarola who hung from a cross. With him were burned all his writings, sermons, essays, and pamphlets.

640:  According to legend, the caliph Omar burned all 200,000 volumes in the library at Alexandria in Egypt. In doing so, he said: “If these writings of the Greeks agree with the Book of God they are useless and need not be preserved; if they disagree, they are pernicious and ought to be destroyed.” In burning the books, the caliph provided six months’ fuel to warm the city’s baths.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
9.1.2  Snuffy  replied to  mocowgirl @9.1.1    last year
What are the reasons that access to knowledge should be suppressed today in public schools?

It depends on the knowledge I would think.  We don't allow Playboy or Penthouse to be displayed in school libraries, why should a book that talks about anal sex, putting on condoms and rape be allowed?

Unfortunately, like every other purge there are extremists who will take the action too far.  But some of those books do not belong accessible to children under the age of 18.

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
9.1.3  mocowgirl  replied to  Snuffy @9.1.2    last year
But some of those books do not belong accessible to children under the age of 18.

Unfortunately, the parents, who are ignorant about sexual behavior in our species and our society, are probably doing far more damage to their children's sexual development than a book that explains various aspects of human sexual behavior.  

Why is a natural biological aspect of human behavior treated as a taboo by some people?  Who taught these people that sex should be mysterious or shameful?  Their parents?  

18?  Really?

(BTW, is there an "appropriate" age to masturbate to porn or should all adults be banned from accessing porn in its many forms because it demeans women and can encourage violence against women for a male to attain sexual satisfaction?)

Report: Young teens are stumbling across porn. Here's how they are finding it | CNN

Families waiting to talk about pornography until their children are teenagers should move up that schedule, according to a new report.

The average that kids first reported being exposed to online porn was 12, according to a new   Common Sense Media survey   of more than 1,300 teens ages 13 to 17.

Fifteen percent first saw porn when they were 10 years old or younger, according to the report.

“Most parents probably think, ‘Well that’s not my kid.’ But the numbers are overwhelming, so it probably is your kid,” said Jim Steyer, Common Sense Media founder and CEO. “This is an incredibly important public health and sexual health issue that’s literally being buried by parents, by educators and by all of us.”

To Dr. Lisa Damour, the new data isn’t a surprise. “Teenagers are exposed to pornography far more often than many adults assume,” said Damour, an Ohio-based clinical psychologist specializing in the development of teenage girls.

Parents should understand that curiosity around sexuality is common for growing kids and assume that their child has probably seen something online they wish they hadn’t, said Dr. Devorah Heitner, author of   “Screenwise: Helping Kids Thrive (and Survive) in Their Digital World”   and founder of Raising Digital Natives, a resource for parents and schools.

How they are finding it

Accessing pornography has become easier to do and easier to hide.

“Today’s teens have more options than previous generations, including generally unfettered access to pornographic websites, social media, and other outlets,” the report said. “Smartphones may also make it easier for children to share pornographic materials with their peers.”

While about 73% of the teens in the survey said they saw online pornography by the time they were 17, they reported different ways they came across it.

Images of violence – not consent

The report also gave insight into what thoughts the teens were left with.

Most teens reported seeing violent or aggressive forms of pornography, including 52% who reported having seen pornography depicting what appears to be rape, choking or someone in pain, the report said. Only about 33% reported seeing content where someone asks for consent.

Although just over a quarter of the teens said they thought pornography gave an accurate depiction of sex, almost half said they got valuable information from the content they saw, according to the data.

Can I keep them from it?

With so much unmonitored time to access internet resources or stumble across pornography, what are families to do?

Start with a conversation, said Damour, author of   “The Emotional Lives of Teenagers: Raising Connected, Capable and Compassionate Adolescents.”

It probably should happen before they are teenagers and before they have a cellphone, she added.
 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
9.1.4  mocowgirl  replied to  mocowgirl @9.1.3    last year

more info....

What to Know About Adolescent Pornography Exposure | Psychology Today

KEY POINTS

  • The majority of adolescents are viewing pornography (on purpose or accidentally).
  • Most pornography is accessed via free websites on mobile devices (phones and tablets).
  • For children without an understanding of healthy sexuality, exposure to pornography (especially violent porn) can be traumatic.
  • Parents can be proactive and talk to their children about healthy sexuality and the reality of pornography.

What’s the problem?

Is the fact that 68.4 percent of adolescents reported viewing pornography at some point in their lifetimes a cause for concern (Wright et al., 2020)? There has been an ongoing debate for decades about the potential pros and cons of pornography—yet the bulk of literature reveals that for adolescents, such exposure can be harmful (Rothman, 2021). For example, adolescent pornography exposure has been linked to permissive sexual attitudes (Doornwaard et al., 2015), dominant or aggressive sexual behaviors (Wright et al., 2021), self-objectification and body comparison (Maheux et al., 2021), and the development of pornography-influenced sexual scripts (Bryant, 2010).

In addition, the average age of first pornography exposure is between 11 and 12 years old (Kraus & Rosenberg, 2014; Rothman, 2021). Adolescents at age 11 may or may not have a cognitive understanding of sex and healthy   sexuality . For those that do not, exposure to pornographic videos (especially videos of violent, forced, group, or brutal sexual acts) may be   traumatic . These youth may not have an accurate view of sex by which to contrast what they see actors performing in pornographic videos. They may not have a schema (or mental representation or category) that informs them that what they are seeing is unrealistic, unethical, illegal, or abnormal. The lack of healthy sexuality may make pornography exposure distressing or disturbing as children try to assimilate what they have seen (“Is this what sex is?”).
 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
9.1.5  mocowgirl  replied to  Snuffy @9.1.2    last year
It depends on the knowledge I would think. 

Besides books on the science of sex, what other books would be on the banned list?

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
9.1.6  Snuffy  replied to  mocowgirl @9.1.3    last year
Unfortunately, the parents, who are ignorant about sexual behavior in our species and our society, are probably doing far more damage to their children's sexual development than a book that explains various aspects of human sexual behavior.  

There are parents (and teachers) who are ignorant of a lot of things that children need to know.  That's why I have been in favor of a "life skills" type of class that is age appropriate and taught in each grade from kindergarten thru 12th.  Such topics that these classes could touch each year could include how to cook for yourself, how to balance a checkbook, how to sew on a button, gun safety (too many children get their such training thru movies and TV).  There are many skills that we as adults take for granted that children need to know and I'm afraid they are not learning it.

Yes, children are more able to find porn these days thanks to the internet access they enjoy.  Does porn give a good education on sexual behavior that children should be learning?  I would tend to say not really, you point out above how much of porn is violence porn.  Do children learn how to interact with their peers by watching porn?  Again, I would say not really.   

18?  Really?

That is currently the law so yes.  Personally I would have the age of adulthood higher as the human brain is the last organ to fully develop and doesn't fully mature until a person is around 25.  But there can be just as many arguments against that as for it.  

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
9.1.7  Snuffy  replied to  mocowgirl @9.1.5    last year
Besides books on the science of sex, what other books would be on the banned list?

That would be a decision made at the local school boards IMO.  I don't like to get into specifics as there are some books that are banned in some places that I do not agree with, such as Catcher in the Rye or Huck Finn.  There are other books allowed that probably shouldn't be available to any age child in a school library.  I mean, in my school library  (small town so one school for 1st grade thru 12th and only the one library for the entire school) I was able to find books on how to conduct a black mass.  Don't know how that got put up on the shelves.

The underlying discussion in recent times revolves around sex.  While a book on gay sex may be ok for a teen to read, I don't think it should be available for a pre-teen.  

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
9.1.8  cjcold  replied to  Snuffy @9.1.6    last year
the human brain is the last organ to fully develop

Somebody should tell that to the military. 

I never felt comfy around kids with guns.

 
 

Who is online

Kavika
Vic Eldred


33 visitors