[Report] Flamebaiting

[The New World Oceania]

Specific instances emboldened.

All art is inherently educational. It is inhuman to suggest otherwise.

You're talkin' out your hoop, mate.

Your entire argument consists of "IT ISNT TECHNICALLY BANNING THEM GAIZ OH MA GAWD"

In point of fact it does not, which you would know if you had read this thread. But whatever makes you feel like you have the intellectual high ground. Clearly that's your primary aim here, so feel free to ignore anything I say if it interferes with your masturbatory shite-talking.

Give an actual argument that could stand up to a rational human

Wouldn't we need a rational human first?

as to why they should ban

Here's a thought. Since you're so insistent that this is a ban, how about you explain to me just how that is so. No talking about me, or what I've argued, not stupid "NOT TEKNIKLY BAN HURR" shit. You explain, in your own words, how this is a ban, and maybe you'll even change my mind. And wouldn't that be a fine feather in your clever clogs cap, eh?

a young-adult romance but they shouldn't ban Lolita, Romeo and Juliet, Brave New World, 1984, Ulysses, Finnegan's Wake, Independence Day, Canada, Women with Men, the Fountainhead, Invisible Man, the Sound and the Fury, Wise Blood, Monster, the Scarlet Letter, Oedipus Rex, the Book Thief, Novakovich, Hamlet, Macbeth, Shalespeare as a whole, the Bell Jar, Plath's Journals, Milkweed, the Things They Carried, Handmaid's Tale, Hitchhiker's Guide, Gwendolyn Brooks or Patricia Smith or Sarah Kay, a Song of Ice and Fire, the Diary of Anne Frank, In Cold Blood.

I think it would be perfectly reasonable not to have several of these in middle school libraries, though I'm not especially familiar with all of them.

Every book anyone has ever objected to, and you're for making it harder for kids to read John Green.

I'm not. I just don't think the school board that is is necessarily wrong to do so.

Don't you dare use the word "inconsistent" the rest of your life.

What's that? I couldn't hear you from up there on your high horse.

Once, I said I would never, ever stoop to the ignoramus' levels of incompetence by refusing to debate with a single word.
But the demonstrable insistence on your denial of what anyone, anyone has actually said has left me no choice.

I'm not going to argue with a strawman.

Gosh, and now you're misusing common logical fallacies? You're not just trying too hard, you're doing a shit job of it.

[Ifreann]

I don't think it's flaming or baiting to be dismissive of what seems to me to be a concerted effort to come off as more intellectual than, and by extension superior to those you're arguing with. Suggesting that you're irrational might be a little rude, but it's pretty standard fare on NSG.

[Atramentar]

I don't think it's flaming or baiting to be dismissive of what seems to me to be a concerted effort to come off as more intellectual than, and by extension superior to those you're arguing with. Suggesting that you're irrational might be a little rude, but it's pretty standard fare on NSG.

To which you were referring. We wouldn't want people thinking you're ignorant, too.

*** Warned for flamebait ***

Apparently the definition is subject to case-by-case determination.