EDITOR’S NOTE: This article contains obscene material. While the material is directly from books marketed toward children, it is pornographic in nature and arguably not morally suitable for anyone to expose themselves to, including adults.
CV NEWS FEED // During a U.S. Senate hearing on so-called “book bans,” Sen. John Kennedy, R-LA, read passages from two pornographic LGBTQ books marketed toward children.
Both books have been widely singled out by many parents as inappropriate content to which their children are exposed.
In addition, both books were removed from Florida public school libraries last year, following the pro-parent initiatives of Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ Department of Education.
One of the books is titled “All Boys Aren’t Blue.”
“And I will quote from it,” Kennedy said.
“I put some lube on and got him on his knees,” Kennedy read from the point of view of the book’s minor male protagonist. “And I began to slide in from him from behind.”
I pulled out of him and kissed him while he masturbated. He asked me to turn over while he slipped a condom on himself. This was my ass. And I was struggling to imagine someone inside me.
He got on top and slowly inserted himself into me. It is the worst pain I think I have ever felt in my life. Eventually I felt a mix of pleasure with the pain.
“All Boys Aren’t Blue,” Kennedy repeated the title.
“The second,” he said, “is another much-discussed book. I’m sure you’re familiar with it. It’s called ‘Gender Queer.’”
Kennedy continued, directly quoting the explicit memoir:
I got a new strap-on harness today. I can’t wait to put it on you. It will fit my favorite dildo perfectly. You’re going to look so hot. I can’t wait to have your c*** in my mouth.
I’m going to give you the blowjob of your life. Then I want you inside of me.
George M. Johnson is the author of “All Boys Aren’t Blue,” which he subtitled “A Memoir-Manifesto.” He replied defiantly to Kennedy’s reading of his book on X (formerly known as Twitter), writing: “All Boys Arent Blue has Officially made it to a congressional hearing. The fight continues.”
The Tuesday Judiciary Committee hearing titled “Book Bans: Examining How Censorship Limits Liberty and Literature” was held partly in response to a supposed “anti-book ban law” in Illinois that Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed into law back in June. Presiding was Sen. Dick Durbin, D-IL, the Senate majority whip, and the chair of the committee.
Durbin is a self-professed Catholic and a staunch ally of the LGBTQ movement. He has an “F” rating from the Catholic Accountability Project.
Both pro-parents’-rights and anti-parents’-rights witnesses testified at the committee hearing. One of the opponents of parental rights who spoke during the hearing was Democratic Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias, who ardently defended his state’s controversial new law.
Kennedy and Giannoulias clashed in a heated exchange.
“Mr. Secretary,” the senator said. “What are you asking us to do? Are you suggesting that only librarians should decide whether the two books that I just referenced should be available to kids?”
“No,” the secretary of state initially replied.
“Tell me what you’re saying,” Kennedy pressed him.
“First of all, there’s this–”
“Don’t give me a speech,” the Republican said, cutting him off. “Tell me what you’re asking me to do.”
“With all due respect, Senator,” Gainnoulias responded, “The words you spoke are disturbing, especially coming out of your mouth. It’s very disturbing. But I would also tell you that we’re not advocating for kids to read porn.”
“What are you advocating for?” asked Kennedy.
The Illinois Democrat proceeded to take a jab at “random parents.”
“We are advocating for parents – random parents – not to have the ability, under the guise of keeping kids safe, to try to challenge the worldview of every single manner on these issues,” he said.
Giannoulias later clarified his apparent anti-parent stance, arguing that he dreaded where things might go if “individual parents are allowed to make a decision of where that line is.” He went on to compare the two pornographic books to “To Kill a Mockingbird,” which he claimed “includes a rape scene.”
“I think it becomes a slippery slope,” the secretary concluded.
“I think you ought to think about it a little bit more before you come here,” replied Kennedy. “If you’re going to propose something, you ought to be able, in thirty seconds, to be able to explain what you’re asking us to do.”
Kennedy’s line of questioning illustrated a point that is often used to criticize the argument that monitoring inappropriate content for children amounts to “book banning.”
A few months ago, CatholicVote President Brian Burch got into a similar exchange with a New York Times reporter who was interviewing him in an attempt to craft a “hit piece” on his organization’s successful Hide the Pride campaign.
As CatholicVote previously reported:
“The substantive question here,” he told her, “is the content of these books. And, it’s interesting that…no national reporter of any significance that I’m aware of is willing to write on the actual story which is, What is it that is in these books that is so objectionable? Why are parents…trying to check out books to keep them away from kids?”
He asked the reporter if she was familiar with what was in the “pride” books in question. “I looked at them,” she answered.
Burch asked her which ones she looked at. “She couldn’t answer,” he noted.
He asked her if she actually read the content of any of the books. “No, she had not.”
Burch observed that she was “writing a story about books that parents object to, and she as the reporter has not even read any of them.”
