Oy vey....

[conuly]

"Filthy language," said Conder of the profanity. "I'm not going to repeat the language. Our job is to protect kids from things that aren't good for kids."

Repeat after me: Nobody was ever harmed for hearing or reading profanity. Nobody. And by the 9th grade, there's very little in the way of profanity that your kid hasn't heard yet.

This is very nicely summed up here:

When did we have to start saying these things? "Book burnings aren't right." "Torture is bad." "The accused deserve trials." "You can't spend more than you earn." "Borrowing is not earning." "Wars suck." "It's called Social Security because it's supposed to be *more* secure than the stock market."

*sighs* Well, I can always move to Antarctica, live with the penguins, study their folkways. Bet they don't burn books.

Comments

[meryls-corner.livejournal.com]

I was trying to show the possible problems of not allowing parents to censor what their children read. And your post made me realize that I didn't answer all the questions.
Maybe children should have the right to read without censorship, and that does play a part in getting children to trust their own judgement. But how would the government be able to enforce this right? I'm not saying book burning is right. I'm just saying that attempting to stop parents from censoring what what their children read would cause many problems.

[conuly]

But how would the government be able to enforce this right?

They could start by not bowing to the demands of self-righteous parents every time said parents object to a book's existance. I'm not saying "go into every home and make sure the parents don't censor their children's reading", I'm saying "don't let the parents decide the curriculum and stock the libraries".

I'm just saying that attempting to stop parents from censoring what what their children read would cause many problems.

And...? Lots of things cause problems. Do you think we should take the easy way out, always?

[meryls-corner.livejournal.com]

I don't think parents should be allowed to stock the libraries either... but what should a school do if a parent said a child couldn't read a book?
No I don't think we should take the easy way out. I was getting images of the going into homes scene you described.

[conuly]

I don't think parents should be allowed to stock the libraries either... but what should a school do if a parent said a child couldn't read a book?

Tell them that it's not up to them, and that it's important to protect the first amendment rights of others. We're not talking about 9 year olds here, we're discussing teenagers, at 13, 14, 15 years old. That's more than old enough to choose their own reading material.

[meryls-corner.livejournal.com]

All right. I wish someone could talk sense like that to the people I'm living with now, but I doubt it would work. You're right. By that age they should decide.

[conuly]

*hugs*

Sorry. I get so caught up in this issue, I just talk people into the dust, don't I?

[meryls-corner.livejournal.com]

That's okay. Thank you.