Too late to opt-out: Supreme Court ultimately can’t save the religious right’s futile book bans

Can you deal with someone “love, kindness and respect” while insisting on his identity at the same time is to the point that it cannot be recognized?

the supreme court hearing Oral arguments on Tuesday against Taylor, Which has become known as the case of “not less homosexuals”, because it exceeds preservation objections to children’s books, which were taught in the chapters of Maryland, that position as a natural fact in life. The arguments included many legal persons about “burden” against “coercion”, or what constitutes the “religious belief” that is held pure. But at the heart of the battle it was a more philosophical question, one answer should be intuitive: Is it possible to “respect” someone while trying to erase his existence?

The case is the decision of the Board of Directors of the Montgomery County School to include books that are characterized by marriage of the same sex and passing personalities and ravages as a woman as part of its curriculum. The Beckty Fund, a right -wing religious organization, is sued on behalf of parents who want to choose their children from the lessons that involve these books, claiming that just exposure to books violates their religious beliefs. The lawyer of the educational area told the court that these books are not different from the books that depict working women or soldiers who are fighting in wars, both of which are the behaviors prohibited by some religions. “These lessons are students who must deal with their peers with respect,” he said. He said that exposing children to different beliefs is not a mandate they follow, just just a teaching in what appears to be the world.

“I don’t think the explicit ban is probably, in the sense that the educational areas will prohibit students from the presence of certain books,” the Supreme Court, Ian Melrah, said, “I do not think that the explicit ban is probably, in the sense that the educational areas will prohibit students from the presence of certain books,” Ian Melzer, the Legal analyst at Vox. However, he said that such a ruling can “deter public schools from appointing any books with LGBTQ topics or from using books with Queer characters in the semester.” Functional Create a national version of the “Never Less Gay” law in Florida Freedom of expression has been suppressed in the classroom.

Do you want more Amanda Marcot on politics? Subscribe to the newsletter for it Only standing room.

The right -wing lawyer argued that censorship of these books was not about the lack of respect for people, but to protect the “innocence of children”. It is a nonsense, because it assumes that there is a “respectable” way to erase people. But it was also ridiculous, as if hiding these books would protect children from knowing LGBTQ identities. (The undeclared institution is the wrong opinion that can prevent children from growing.) The issue clarifies the inception of the mobile in the heart of the Maga movement: they will never show their great great dream “America”, when “Queer” was nothing. Such a period did not exist, but especially in an era in which strange people are visible in the culture of pop, the Internet and the general community. The government can force teachers not to say “gay” in school, but children will hear about them elsewhere.

During the arguments, Judge Kitanji Brown Jackson explained this point more clearly, as the prosecutor’s lawyer asked what extent this right should go to the “withdrawal”. I asked if a gay teacher would be allowed to get a wedding photo on her office? Or if you put a group of students ’stickers“ Love is Love ”in the hallway? Or if the passing teacher insists that students use their favorite name and pronouns? On this last point, the conservative lawyer insisted that the teacher has no right to inform students of how to address them.

This answer gave the game away. From the usual practice of teachers to dictate how students processing them: the first name or the last name? Miss or lady? Only converted people, in the decision of this lawyer, do not deserve this basic respect from students. It is only about insulting them, and not “protecting” children from knowing transit identities. But Jackson’s largest point is crucial. Preventing some of the semesters from the classroom will not hide the presence of the stranger from children. And the efforts made to go to this unforgettable path only leads to more dramatic control, such as informing the strange teachers to hide their husbands, while allowing the straight teachers freely to talk about them. At this point, the imagination that is preserved the imagination that is preserved “respect” and “equality” is a joke.

The BECKETE Fund’s efforts to circumvent this problem depend on the bad intention, by distorting or even lying about what is in the books to make it seem to be sexual explicit. Their communications strategy has an introduction to “Pride PuPPY”, a short stories book that highlights a family day at the Pred show. BECKET lawyers call that the book “calls on children who are three and four years old to search for pictures of things that they may find in the Predic Show, including” Intersex ” [flag]“A”[drag] King “and”[drag] Queen, “Leather”, “Lingerie”, and a picture of the famous LGBTQ activists and sex factor, “Marsha P. Johnson.”

All the words aimed at making gay adults imagine a scandal material, but the book itself is completely innocent, which is what the readers can verify Watch this video for 3 minutes for a woman Reading it, with the completion of the illustrations. Illustrator also refers to a blog.“The aforementioned skin is a leather jacket, and it is a fairly common article of clothes that children sometimes wear!” The clouds are just adults wearing clothes. “Underwear” is worn out of clothes, like super heroes. Johnson’s drawing does not mention its history. Likewise, Becket’s lawyer insisted that another book tells children their gender “changes based on weather”, but it does not provide any evidence in the mega court files. When Judge Sonia Sotomiore was asked what is wrong with the pictures of husbands of the same sex who hold their hands, the Beckket lawyer expressed some parents’ saying objecting to adult films, as if they were the same.

The paradox here is that because of the Internet, children find adult materials. Obtaining education in sexual life, sexual identity and human diversity before they see that things – so that they can distinguish between truth and imagination – is the only real way to protect children. Books such as “PRIDE PUPPY” are prevented from early sexual preparation for children, by answering questions about the identity of the stranger in appropriate ways of age. If adults do not respond to the curiosity of children, children go to look alone. Leave their own devices and search engine, children find not enough materials enough to deal with them.

There is one thing to monitor the Queer books that you accomplish is to refer to the LGBTQ children that there is something shameful about who they are. “LGBTQ+ Young people who enroll in schools with comprehensive sexual education curricula are lower levels of depression and suicide,” Explanation of the American Psychological Association In amicus summary to support the educational zone. When listening to medium arguments from the right before the Supreme Court today, it is difficult to get rid of the feeling that this shame is the desired result. Children will learn what “gay” in one way or another, and in very small ages – many of them will be strange. The only question is whether the authorities in their life tell them that they are bad people for that. Whatever the Supreme Court it decides, the goals of the Republican Party with the case are clear. They cannot win the culture of culture, but they will use these lawsuits to spit in the face of all people who only offend them.