Show-Me 'Explicit Content Crackdown

On the surface there's nothing wrong about keeping smut away from youngsters. 

However . . .

Here's the dangerous part that most people ignore . . . This effort seems to give legal authority to courts, administrators & law enforcement to determine what is "explicit" and what isn't . . . Fact is, very few people agree on any standards which have rarely been defined by SCOTUS. 

Who do you think has the authority to define what is "explicit" for students??? 

Most of the determinations will be made by a state board that will, ironically, be subjected to viewing all manner of allegedly harmful filth . . . No word if they're taking applications. 

The reality . . . This is part very real push back against LGBT picture books for VERY young students that were universally unpopular. 

Again . . . The crackdown has very widespread support despite the vast array of consequences it holds.

Check-it . . .

It would be a class "A" misdemeanor if anyone provides visually 'explicit' sexual material to a student at private or public schools.

The images can come from books, magazines, videos, or online content and librarians or staff members could be impacted.

Read more via link . . .

Book bans: New Missouri law makes it a crime to share 'explicit' material to students

It would be a class "A" misdemeanor if anyone provides visually explicit sexual material to a student. ST. LOUIS - Books across the state of Missouri are getting removed from shelves, as schools face potential criminal prosecution due to a new state law.