On Monday at the Republic, MO school board meeting, four Republic School Board members reviewed a year-old complaint that three books are inappropriate reading material for high school children. In a 4-0 vote, the members decided to ax two of the three books from the high school curriculum and the library shelves: Twenty Boy Summer by Sarah Ockler and Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut. Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson was spared. The resident who filed the original complaint targeted these three books because “they teach principles contrary to the Bible“:

Wesley Scroggins, a Republic resident, challenged the use of the books and lesson plans in Republic schools, arguing they teach principles contrary to the Bible.

“I congratulate them for doing what’s right and removing the two books,” said Scroggins, who didn’t attend the board meeting. “It’s unfortunate they chose to keep the other book.”

Speak is an award-winning novel that describes a high school date rape victim’s personal struggles. This novel was approved because, as school superintendent Vern Minor said, only one page is used to “tastefully, not graphically” describe the rape and there were only three instances of profanity. But Twenty Boy Summer, a book about a young girl who struggles with loving another after her boyfriend suddenly dies, apparently focused too much on “sensationalizing sexual promiscuity” and featured “questionable language, drunkenness, lying to parents and a lack of remorse.” “If the book had ended on a different note, I might have though differently,” said Minor.

As for the modern classic Slaughterhouse Five, the book is no stranger to censorship. One of the first literary acknowledgments that homosexual men, or “fairies” in the novel, were victims in the Holocaust, school classrooms and libraries frequently ban the book for its use of profanity and depictions of sex. The Supreme Court actually considered the First Amendment implications of the removal of this book, among others, from libraries in the 1982 case Island Tree School District v. Pico. The Court’s plurality concluded that “local school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books and seek by their removal to ‘prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion.’” Minor’s reason for removing the novel? “The language is just really, really intense…I don’t think it has any place in high school…I’m not saying it’s a bad book.”

While the books will be removed from the curriculum and the library, students desiring to read these books can get parent permission to use them for a school project. “If the parent thinks ‘For Johnny, it is age-appropriate,’ then we’ll let the parent make the call,” Minor said. It is important to note that, out of the four School Board Members, only one has actually read all three books.

As negotiations continue over a debt reduction deal that has unneccesarily become part of the debate over raising the debt ceiling, some advocates are now looking for a way to raise the debt ceiling without needing the votes of obstinate, hostage-taking Republicans.

Today, a group of House Democrats held a press conference where they advocated for a fail-safe measure to ensure that the debt ceiling is hiked. These Democrats said that if all other measures fail, President Obama should simply issue an executive order invoking the 14th amendment to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling.

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep. John Larson (CT) and Assistant Minority Leader Jim Clyburn (SC) explained that their colleagues believe that if Republicans are intent on “destroying government,” then there should be a “fail-safe mechanism” to ensure that the debt ceiling is hiked and that this mechanism is the 14th amendment:

LARSON: If a small group is really that intent on destroying government, and is intent on saying they don’t believe there are any ramifications for their irresponsibility then we have to have a fail-safe mechanism, we believe that fail safe mechanism is the 14th amendment and the president of the United States.

CLYBURN: So I would say to the president, if that’s what lands on his desk, a short-term listing of the debt ceiling — he should put it on his desk next to an executive order he will have drawn up. And with the same pen that he vetoes that short term debt ceiling extension, he should sign an executive order invoking the 14th Amendment to this issue. I am convinced that whatever discussions about the legality of this issue can continue.

Watch it:

Clyburn added that when he presented his idea to the Democratic Caucus, it was met with applause. House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has not yet taken an stance on the issue, but Larson said she is aware of Democrats’ support for the method.

President Obama is currently throwing cold water on the idea that the Constitution will save America from the impending default crisis, but this view has some high-profile dissenters. Right-wing legal scholars Eric Posner and Adrian Vermeule made the argument that Obama can invoke the constitutional option in a New York Times op-ed published last week. Earlier this month, former President Bill Clinton said that if he was in Obama’s place, he would use the 14th amendment himself to raise the ceiling.

Rep. John Culberson (R-TX) has an overactive imagination. He’s convinced that the Obama Administration somehow managed to ban references to God from military funerals in Houston:

A Texas lawmaker is calling for a Congressional investigation of the Houston National Cemetery after he went undercover and determined that cemetery officials are still preventing Christian prayers at the funerals of military veterans.

“The Obama administration continues to try to prevent the word ‘God’ from being used at the funerals of our heroes,” said. Rep. John Culberson (R-TX). “It’s unacceptable and I’m going to put a stop to it as fast as humanly possible.”

Culberson told Fox News Radio he attended a burial service at the cemetery under cover on July 8 where he said volunteer members of the honor guard from the Veterans of Foreign Wars were prohibited from using any references to God.

Culberson’s allegations echo a lawsuit that various veterans groups filed claiming that they were somehow prevented from even saying the word “God” while participating in military funerals. There’s only one problem with these claims — they have no basis in reality.

The allegations claim that a low-level Veterans Affairs official, veterans cemetery director Arleen Ocasio, specifically instructed volunteers employed by the VA not to mention God or otherwise engage in religious speech during a funeral without her approval. In reality, Ocasio said nothing of the sort:

Ocasio has never told anyone that the VFW District 4 honor guards were prohibited from including prayer or religious speech in its ritual unless families submit the prayer or religious speech to her in writing prior to the committal services. [...] Ocasio told the VA Voluntary Services trainees that they needed to ensure that their military funeral honors were reflective of the desires of the families of the Veterans being honored, that there is no “do over” for a committal service, and that no Veteran’s family should ever leave offended or unhappy with the services provided by the Cemetery staff or the registered VA volunteers.

In other words, the administration takes the radical position that military funerals should reflect the wishes of the families of the deceased. If a family wants a religious ceremony, then they should have one. But it is not the job of government workers — even those working on a volunteer basis — to decide for military families how their loved ones should be honored.

Culberson’s attempt to politicize these funerals is nothing sort of disgusting, and doubly so because his allegations lack any basis in fact.