ACLU Continues Fight To Keep Communist Propaganda In School Library
Posted on July 12, 2006
Via Local 10
A group made up of Cuban exile organizations and community leaders held a news conference Wednesday in support of the removal of a children’s book about Cuba from public school libraries.
The Miami-Dade School Board agreed with complaints about the book “Vamos a Cuba” and voted in favor of banning it and 23 other books in the children’s travel series on June 14. That decision was made despite recommendations by a review committee and Superintendent Rudy Crew to keep the book on the shelves.
The American Civil Liberties Union and the Miami-Dade Student Government Association immediately filed a lawsuit in response to the “Vamos a Cuba” decision.
On June 28, U.S. District Judge Alan Gold told the school board to keep the book in school libraries, saying he wanted to “hold the status quo” until a July 21 hearing.
Wednesday, a group that supports the removal of the book from libraries held a news conference at Versailles Restaurant.
The organizations represented at the news conference included: Cuban Patriotic Board, Cuban Political Prisoners Council, Cuban Municipalities in Exile, Spanish American League Against Discrimination, Concerned Cuban Parents Committee and Committee in Support of Dissidents Brigade 2506.
School Board member Frank Bolanos, who led the effort to remove the book, said, “‘Vamos a Cuba’ is a one-sided and incomplete picture of life in Cuba. The author fails to mention there is no free speech, no free elections, no freedom of the press — real issues people there face every day.”
“While I absolutely support the author’s right to write and publish the book, I stand with concerned Miami-Dade taxpayers. We shouldn’t have to subsidize what is essentially political propaganda about life in Castro’s Cuba,” Bolanos said.
The ACLU are using their infamous “slippery slope” argument. Of course this argument doesn’t hold water. They are dubbing this as censorship, yet it is no such thing. Censorship would be the government refusing to allow people to publish, or people to purchase certain materials. It isn’t censorship when a school decides to no longer provide biased propaganda at the taxpayer’s expense.
This is the same ACLU that has fought so hard to exclude the Bible from school grounds. They even went so far as to force a 5th grade teacher to remove his personal Bible from his own classroom even though it was for personal use. Is this where the slippery slope started?
I like this quote from an earlier article on this topic.
Mr. Bolanos – again, unlike his illustrious and mega-credentialed native-born foes – understands and reveres America’s founding fathers. Thus he quotes Thomas Jefferson: “To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”
Alas, by bringing up Thomas Jefferson in attempting to influence the ACLU and the teachers unions, Mr. Bolanos erred grievously. The ACLU’s founder and guiding light seemed to prefer Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin. And the teachers unions probably think Thomas Jefferson was the latest runner-up on “American Idol.”
The real news here is that groups are gathering together to support getting rid of the communist garbage in this school, and oppose the ACLU who wants taxpayers to subsidize the lies. Bravo to these groups.
» Filed Under ACLU, Communism, News
Trackback URL
Comments
14 Responses to “ACLU Continues Fight To Keep Communist Propaganda In School Library”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
“The ACLU are using their infamous ’slippery slope’ argument.”
Yet you don’t show any evidence of this in your post, Jay. Just as you have in the past, you make a claim and expect it to be swallowed uncritically, with no factual support.
Show us where in their filing the ACLU employs a “slippery slope” argument.
If you were not so lazy to do your own research and click on the link provided to the original article you can see where they use this argument.
Show us where in their filing the ACLU employs a “slippery slope” argument.
Have you even read the filing, Jay?
You are the idiot that can’t read. I never said the ACLU “employed” the slippery slope arguement “in their filing”. I said they are using the slippery slope argument followed by a period. They are using the slippery slope argument in this article. I showed you the paragraph, now admit you are an idiot and find another straw man.
“I never said the ACLU ‘employed’ the slippery slope arguement ‘in their filing’. I said they are using the slippery slope argument followed by a period.”
Okay… so if the ACLU is not using the ’slippery slope’ argument in their legal fight against the banning of the book in question, what legal argument(s) are they using?
Have you bothered to find out? Do the facts in the case matter to you in the slightest, or are you content to get your information in this case exclusively from television stations?
And speaking of which… where is the original statement from the ACLU that makes the “prime example of the slippery slope” argument?
The ACLU is supporting the spread of communism to children which is in itself a slippery slope since when communism comes in out goes free speech, and other human rights.
It is not only a slippery slope that will end up depriving us of our freedoms if the books goal is realized but it’s victims are are children who are very vulnerable.
So why does the ACLU want the U.S. to become communist?
Have any of you on either side of the debate read the book in question? I’m wondering just how bad it really is.
Whatever it is, I think banning it is just plain silly. Children who would read the book haven’t a clue what communism is, and even if they did, are we really so paranoid that we think they’d unite and rise up to overthrow the government?
It doesn’t.
If anyone is interested in reading the text of the book, someone bothered to transcribe the whole thing.
http://link.cubanamericanpundits.blogspot.com/2006/04/to-ban-or-not-ban-that-is-question.html
Just scroll down a bit and you’ll find the text as well as descriptions of all the pictures.
Thanks, redmonk!
That’s all there is to the book? Sure, I think it paints an unrealistic picture of a happy Cuba that doesn’t exist, but is it really so bad that we need to ban it?
“You are the idiot that can’t read.”
I got an email recently from someone named Stephenson that indicated that the writer would not be interested in a discussion that “resorts to name calling”.
Was that you, Jay, or just someone pretending to be you?
And where is the original statement from the ACLU that makes the “prime example of the slippery slope” argument?
Captain Rational,
“It doesn’t. “
Can you prove that or are you just assuming it does not?
It has a lot in common with American individualist anarchism which teaches a person has the right to harm themselves, their property, or those who consent to be harmed. Some forms of communism have the same tenet in their dogma.
So you want me to prove a negative? Basically what you’re saying is that the ACLU is promoting communism until someone proves otherwise. Logic don’t work that way.
Major, when exactly did Kerwin Brown or any of his cohorts here display the least indication that they understand or respect the concept of logic?