Political Correctness = Foolishness

There never has been a time when a political party promoting porn for children have been the good guys. Degenerate as a Party, yes; but good guys -- no.

So you're for books of child porn?

Then you're for some books being banned. You'll find that principle based standards have limits.

No, you advocated for it because you didn't think your position through.

It's the Socratic method, not nonsense. I've established that some limits on speech are expectable without being the bad guys.

The topic itself is likely from liberals that wanted to show profane material to children which resulting in books being banned from schools. As they couldn't directly argue that such material could be shown to kids, so the argument was reframed as book banning to avoid the subject and cast those that didn't want such material being shown to children as the bad guys.

As you used insults as a response to honest debating, it is likely you're more interested in virtue singling than the truth and thus have sided with showing porn to children without realizing you lack the moral high ground.

Yes, you're a hypocritic virtue singular. Good luck pretending you have the moral high ground while defending giving porn to kids.

Gotta love how whomever you were corresponding with, disappears by deleting and taking their ball and running home. I'd wear that as a badge of honor if I were you.
Yet, before they deleted and left, they appear to have gone full sabotage and cranked out three or four downvotes with their 3or4 accounts on everyone refuting the meme claim.

It was the maker of the meme. It might be they realized that the argument was reframed from don't give porn to kids, to your banning books.

The Catholics banned books from the bible...how did that age?

Please elaborate. Are we discussing Dead Sea Scrolls, or what exactly ?

From what one can ascertain online, this is how the that referred to, did age:

Apparently the version that VATICAN I around the year 400 A.D. compiled from the collection of Books up for consideration for inclusion, and the 1546 Council of Trent which assured that this version of the collection of books in a Biblios, contain more than modern Protestant Versions,

....such as post 1600 King James Protestant English Language translation version seems to provide except as an "Apocrypha".
according to paraphrasing franciscanmedia.org "Books not in Protestant Bible" article.

Seems the protestant versions of the bible effectively "BAN" by omission:
1 & 2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom, and Baruch and provide shorter versions for Daniel and Esther than bibles used by Orthodox churches, Eastern Catholics, and Roman Catholics

Although, the King James version is printed to include Maccabees 1 and some with Maccabees 2, apparently it is not considered an "Official" book that belongs in there for Protestants.

Oh, and apparently the Moravians beat the Lutherans to the punch in splintering off from Catholicism

The Torah scrolls are fairly the source apparently for the Old Testament, translated.
Yet there are better experts and information on such that I'd have to defer.

The gospel of Jesus Christ as a Child, The Gospel of Mary Magdalene, and a few others where not considered for the bible. They're not banned however.

The "Index Librorum Prohibitorum" will provide you the full list of books removed or left out of the catholic bible.

I'll take a look, thanks.

When one reads the description of "the index" 1559-1966 in the encyclopedia britannica,
seems the Catholics were not banning books from inclusion in the bible, yet labelling books for censorship, such as you might be risking excommunication from membership if one were to read
vulgarity, own it, or be caught hanging out in church reading heresy against their teachings.
If the Council of Trent in 3 meetings over the course of 1545-1563 revised the Vatican I Council collection of books (the Franciscans state this occurred in 1546) included as
The Biblios (Latin for Colleciton of Books)

"books removed or left out of the catholic bible" are actually books still in the catholic bible and Eastern Orthodox bible, yet 7 books and parts of Daniel and Esther are
omitted from Protestant versions.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Index-Librorum-Prohibitorum

The Book of Mormon had yet to be written.
Is that a banned book too by Protestants and Catholics?
Seems Certain one would not find those in a Public School Library anymore. Or maybe one can?

Or, will Lavar Burton and Morgan Freeman Memes lament their exclusion as Banned ?

That sounds like banning to me.

If one can read, one ought consider to read them all,
and then ask questions of ones parents, clergy, &/or close colleagues, and take notes.

I seem to be missing the books you stated were removed or left out by catholics, as it seems the protestants have "left out" yet include as a separate addendum titled Apocrypha?
Am I missing something else ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prayer_of_Manasseh

Ezdra 1 & 2 ? From what one can read, it seems the Old testament/Torah Book of Ezra is possibly another version of the same books, and as such considered already included.
Sort of not a gotcha, yet more of a nothingburger, as far as catching a church redhanded with banning books.

Some don't consider Manasseh a book, yet a song, and include it between old and new testaments as the Episcopaleans decided to do in 1979... Go for it! Read away!

I don't know what you are doing.

You seem to be rambling.

The Catholics removed books from the Catholic bible that was authorized for use by Catholics.

Other books the Catholics did not permit to be part of the Catholic bible that was authorized for use by Catholics.

Use whatever semantic term you wish, but that amounts to banning.

Any other denomination is not considered.

If one can read one would not post links to me.

I will not use them.

"rambling" or not, at least one of us is displaying being confused.
It makes sense, in context, to a direct response to the "Index Librorum Prohibitorum" shared.

If one book claimed to be "removed", or "left out" of the Bible, could be named, I'm listening.
Sadly, not one is found where it was said to look, that can be attributed to "Catholic:" omission.

The Catholics held meeting in which they chose which religious books that were available at that time where to be accepted as permissable and which were not.

This they did more than once historically.

They also made decisions on books written by the contemporary authors of the particular time.

I cannot know the name of a book that was banned, not chosen, omitted, 1800 years ago.

I could task you with the equally ridiculous instruction to provide me the title of every book in the library of Alexandria before it burned down.

Many "heretical" texts and "gnostic" texts were rejected, or deemed suitable only for church scholars but not dissemination to the general public.

All easier to do when the population consisted of nearly an entirety of illiterate people.

The church wanted to control the narrative harder than the leftist democrats do.

Martin Luther was a Catholic.

The Catholic church had a stack of books (scrolls), "gospels", and picked and chose which went into their accepted compilation book we now call "the bible" for use in "educating" the masses...at masses.

The Catholic church sponsored the burning and banning of books written by religious and secular authors throughout its years of existence.

Anything that threatens the revenue stream.

Just because you cannot find them or name them does not mean they did not exist.

Can you touch your spirit with you fingers?

Yet it exists.

And now, oddly enough, the Catholic church has become a pseudo pedophile cult that is accepting of abortion and other once taboo things that led to iniquity.

Today, the books that are said to be "banned" have not been "banned" or burned.

They have been determined not taxpayer funding worthy to be put in public schools due to their content and/or age appropriateness.

You have to be an adult to buy a Playboy magazine but a 13 year old can get a "suck job how to manual", or a copy of "gay anal for dummies" from their school library...and it will be their little secret?

Do they not already have 24/7 unsupervised access to every sort of pornographic image and description via the internet?

Or is the school desirous to usurp the few supervising parents there are?

It's a challenge to reconcile the first claim with the 2nd two of three statements made on this thread:

1) "The "Index Librorum Prohibitorum" will provide you the full list of books removed or left out of the catholic bible."

2) "I cannot know the name of a book that was banned, not chosen, omitted, 1800 years ago."

3) "I could task you with the equally ridiculous instruction to provide me the title of every book in the library of Alexandria before it burned down."

Claims #2 & #3, negate claim #1; correct ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are 73 books in the Catholic Bible, and 66 in modern KJV Protestant versions.
Both share in common, all 27 books of the New Testament.

https://textandcanon.org/why-the-catholic-bible-has-more-books-than-the-protestant-bible/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Bible
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_of_the_King_James_Version
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your loss that the decision is made to ignore links shared, or the content that anyone
can and likely will verify, even if left on the table.

I think you mean well, yet like Reagan, I trust, yet verify.
&
I bring receipts in the form of links. One can find the content with a simple search engine use.
If the horse won't drink, that's okay by me, for the water was made available.

Otherwise, this is not the first time we are not on the same page, yet we'll leave it at that.
We can disagree on occasion.
Facts are facts, and in this case, I tried to verify your claims, yet disappointedly came up short.

Depends on the book or periodical and what shelf it's on.

The deception here is that one omits making a distinction between an
Elementary School Children's Library and an
Adult County Library. Adult content is for adults. Parental Discretion Advised.

Is there a Reading Rainbow for Adults on PBS Kids ?

That is true, I'll admit

valid point.

Well said.

Depends on if Satan controls the Library & schools.