Sex with a horse is not the same as naked pygmies

Tomeboy wrote in a comment: Sex with a horse is not the same as naked pygmies.

Well, I beg to differ because it clearly is to some people. From my web site (Chronology Part III):

1999, June: National Geographic

PANAMA CITY, Fla. -- A fourth-grade student was reading a magazine when his teacher, Wanda Nelson, grabbed it, called it "pornography," ripped up the offending pages and threw them in a trash can.
The magazine was National Geographic, and the pornography was an article on evolution that included drawings of naked humans.

The Cherry Street Elementary School teacher received a written reprimand on June 15 for "inappropriate action."

But the school superintendent said he did not believe censorship was an issue.

Bay County School Superintendent Larry Bolinger said he supported the teacher's right to stop what she considered a disruption, but said she crossed the line when she damaged the magazine.

Sebastian Allen, 10, had taken his older brother's magazine, a rare collector's issue, to school after Nelson had encouraged students to bring reading material from home in case they completed a state assessment test before time ran out.

[Amusing, n'est ce pas, how the teacher blamed the student for a disruption she created and how the official sided with the teacher? --MN]

People really need to learn the lessons of history: There is nothing that cannot be found offensive by someone, somewhere. All that is needed is an excuse, and as the moral to one of Aesop's fables goes: Any excuse will do for a tyrant.

Comments

"Some people"

My statement..again. "Sex with a horse is not the same as naked pygmies".

And Fang offers an example, exception the better word, of a fourth grade teacher that "censored" pictures of naked homosapiens to equate this with bestiality? Can we assume that Fang considered all facets of my statement, including animal cruelty, as if the perversion wasn't enough?

Here again we have Fang building his logic with generalizations. Nothing new here. Certainly safe and convenient for those ill-equipped, or just too lazy, to do research. Regardless Fang's selection of "some people" is an attempt to equivocate bestiality. Unfortunately, courage would be required to surmise a percentile with "some people". "Some" is simply safer.

FWIW Fang's logic here brings another animal analogy to mind, Bullshi*.

Syndicate content