banning books

[stache hag]

Okay, well, this pertains to a school district, but, it went to the Supreme Court, and it was found that books were not allowed to be banned. And, IMO, I agree. Schools don't teach questionable books, but, be it in a school library, or public, all books should be available. As a parent, if you don't want your child reading a certain book, just don't allow it. As an adult, if you don't like what a book is about or whatever.... don't read it.

This is why we have the First Amendment.


And..... here is a bit of info on the school district case:

Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853, 102 S.Ct. 2799, 73 L.Ed.2d 435 (1982)
In 1975, three school board members sought the removal of several books determined objectionable by a politically conservative organization. The following February, the board gave an "unofficial direction" that the books be removed from the school libraries, so that board members could read them. When the board action attracted press attention, the board described the books as "anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, and just plain filthy." The nine books that were the subject of the lawsuit were Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.; The Naked Ape by Desmond Morris; Down These Mean Streets by Piri Thomas; Best Short Stories of Negro Writers edited by Langston Hughes; Go Ask Alice; Laughing Boy by Oliver LaFarge; Black Boy by Richard Wright; A Hero Ain't Nothin' But a Sandwich by Alice Childress; and Soul on Ice by Eldrige Cleaver.

The board appointed a review committee that recommended that five of the books be returned to the shelves, two be placed on restricted shelves, and two be removed from the library. The full board voted to remove all but one book.

After years of appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld (5-4) the students' challenge to the board's action. The Court held that school boards do not have unrestricted authority to select library books and that the First Amendment is implicated when books are removed arbitrarily. Justice Brennan declared in the plurality opinion: "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."

[sfhbballnut]

That's it plain and simple, thanks. The crazy lady here who is trying to get the Harry Potter books taken out of schools claims shge's trying to save the children's souls. This is the same lady who when asked if she had read them said that they were too long. So there are school age kids reading books that are longer than any she ever read.... lets think about this for a moment......

[Machiavelli]

ok...

if you dont like the topics in the book (no you dont have to read it to know what its about):
dont sell it
dont buy it
dont do reports on it
dont tell others to read it
dont ban it statewide


im fine with a school or group banning a book, but i think that it is unreasonable to ban the book for the entire state.

oh, and of of mice and men is required reading for freshmen in my high school. they also mention of mice and men 3 times in the TV series LOST

What high school do you go to?

I go to Pioneer, which also requirs the reading of mice and men (but only in non-intensive english)


And also, Ben completely hoed Sawyer with that Of Mice and Men quote. Sawyer kind of thinks he's the $h!t

[stache hag]

That's it plain and simple, thanks. The crazy lady here who is trying to get the Harry Potter books taken out of schools claims shge's trying to save the children's souls. This is the same lady who when asked if she had read them said that they were too long. So there are school age kids reading books that are longer than any she ever read.... lets think about this for a moment......

Well, if it got to court, the case I stated above would be used and, the only way for Harry Potter to be banned would be for it to be taken to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court would have to overturn its own previous decision, basically.

So, crazy lady has A LOT of work on her hands!!

(And clearly a lot of time, if she is that obsessed with Harry Potter.)

[steve monkey]

one of the most common features of fascist/repressive/totalitarian societies is that they ban books and censor a free press.
Freedom of speech is regularly under threat and needs to be defended.

[Freetymes]

one of the most common features of fascist/repressive/totalitarian societies is that they ban books and censor a free press.
Freedom of speech is regularly under threat and needs to be defended.

Amazing then that the schools in America are pretty much the bastion of the liberals... And they are banning books? Not very multi-cultural of them now is it???

[Freetymes]

I go to Pioneer

I know... off topic but I am so curious.

Do you mean the Pioneer Highschool in Ann Arbor?

[Backglass]

Amazing then that the schools in America are pretty much the bastion of the liberals... And they are banning books? Not very multi-cultural of them now is it???

Your reaching.

[Machiavelli]

I go to Pioneer

I know... off topic but I am so curious.

Do you mean the Pioneer Highschool in Ann Arbor?

Yeah, why?

[Freetymes]

I go to Pioneer

I know... off topic but I am so curious.

Do you mean the Pioneer Highschool in Ann Arbor?

Yeah, why?

I grew up in Ann Arbor and graduated from Community High also I have a close relitive that is a department head at Pioneer...

VERY SMALL WORLD!!!

[Freetymes]

Amazing then that the schools in America are pretty much the bastion of the liberals... And they are banning books? Not very multi-cultural of them now is it???

Your reaching.

I work for a major educational instatution and I can assure you this is no reach, at least in america!

[Paulicus]

In Canada they have a subtler aproach.. they change the curriculums books in the school system to support whatever politcal mind they want us to turn towards. Gay marriage, tolerance etc.

[mandalorian2298]

When it comes to banning books to prevent them from "corrupting our children with anti-christian ideas" etc. I am against it. I belive that my value system is simply to different from the value system of a person who would support that kind of censorship, that I don't see much point in discussing it.

Another topic is the ban of Nazi propaganda. Many people belive that it is a simple matter of cultural norms to ban Nazi propaganda. While I am sane enough to disagree with nacism, I feel that this approach is wrong. Baning books is, IMO, same as admiting that you have no arguments to prove that the author is wrong. Nacism is based on the ideas that are IMO so far from truth, that they can be easily refuted. Therefore, I think that the Nazi propaganda should be riddiculed, not baned. Baning it means giving it more intellectual weight then it deserves.

Oh, yeah...Let me give you an example: "Nazis were aiming to create physically superior master-race. Under the leadership of a hystericall dwarf "

[cowshrptrn]

one of the most common features of fascist/repressive/totalitarian societies is that they ban books and censor a free press.
Freedom of speech is regularly under threat and needs to be defended.

Amazing then that the schools in America are pretty much the bastion of the liberals... And they are banning books? Not very multi-cultural of them now is it???

How is it liberals who are banning books?

Banning Harry Potter because its not good Christian Values sounds liek something an evangelical, therefore republican, christian would be doing. Its right up there along with banning gay marraige (again forcing your decision onto someone else, but thats a completely different thread)

I believe that you can't censor a book, but at the same time you need to show some restraint in required reading for schools. You need to censor shelves of highly controversial things in elementary and junior high schools. You defiantely can't give a kindergartener access to a romance novel, their heas woudl explode, the same way you can't give them huckleberry finn since they dont' realise that the connotation of some words in the 1800s is very different form ones now.

[Paulicus]

When it comes to banning books to prevent them from "corrupting our children with anti-christian ideas" etc. I am against it. I belive that my value system is simply to different from the value system of a person who would support that kind of censorship, that I don't see much point in discussing it.

"

I see your point and agree in freedom of information.. but kids in kindergarten should be learning to read and play, not why little Freddy has two Mommy's/ Daddy's. Save it until they're older. That's why films are rated R etc.

[cowshrptrn]

Well you can't actively instill them with morals regarding religion at such a young age, because that's brainwashing, believe it or not.

You can go for noncontroversial stuff like sharing, being polite, and all that other crap you forget once you turn 10, but telling someone that syoung that its wrong for someone to have homosexual parents is wrong.

If the situation comes up then they shoudl be given the information at a neutral position, regardless of your opinion.

[Sir. Benjamin]

well, i do think people have the right to choose what they read...

[owheelj]

I am a very strong supporter of free speech. Banning books is ridiculous. If there is a problem with a book people should put forward what those problems are rather than not letting people see the problem for themselves. It stems from this dangerous arrogance of faith in your beliefs. We should question if we're right or not and look at the implications of us being wrong. I'm sure we've all made mistakes. We need to allow other people to make their own mistakes and decide what they believe for themselves. Books about "Freddy with two dads" aren't promoting homosexuality, they're promoting tolerance and acceptance of people who are different. I fail to see how teaching children to accept difference can be anything other than a good thing.

Regarding the book review of "Of Mice and Men" that made your teacher think you're racist - what did you say in the review? The book clearly isn't racist but I think it's easy to see how you could write a racist view on that book if you misunderstood it.

[Backglass]

but kids in kindergarten should be learning to read and play, not why little Freddy has two Mommy's/ Daddy's.

What if it was called "freddy's parents" instead and the father was black, while the mother was white. In the book, freddy's dad cooks dinner every night and freddy's mom goes to work at the factory. Freddy is a happy boy. Would that be OK?

[Paulicus]

But I ask again .. In kindergarten?? Move it to grade 6/7 where they teach them sex ed(in Canada). Then give them all the books they want, it just seems wrong as well to promote one teaching or book above another. Beyond that if they don't ask why tell??

[vtmarik]

But I ask again .. In kindergarten?? Move it to grade 6/7 where they teach them sex ed(in Canada). Then give them all the books they want, it just seems wrong as well to promote one teaching or book above another. Beyond that if they don't ask why tell??

What if little Fred does have two dads? Doesn't he deserve the option to read a book designed for young kids with homosexual parents? If he and his parents discuss it, then why restrict the access?

[Freetymes]

one of the most common features of fascist/repressive/totalitarian societies is that they ban books and censor a free press.
Freedom of speech is regularly under threat and needs to be defended.

Amazing then that the schools in America are pretty much the bastion of the liberals... And they are banning books? Not very multi-cultural of them now is it???

How is it liberals who are banning books?

Banning Harry Potter because its not good Christian Values sounds liek something an evangelical, therefore republican, christian would be doing. Its right up there along with banning gay marraige (again forcing your decision onto someone else, but thats a completely different thread)

I believe that you can't censor a book, but at the same time you need to show some restraint in required reading for schools. You need to censor shelves of highly controversial things in elementary and junior high schools. You defiantely can't give a kindergartener access to a romance novel, their heas woudl explode, the same way you can't give them huckleberry finn since they dont' realise that the connotation of some words in the 1800s is very different form ones now.

I was not referring to any single book and I can not speak to HP but I can speak to the books, speech, and conduct that are banned. Without getting long winded let it suffice that anything said or written that contains words that are not approved of in pretty much all public schools and Universities. Unless they were made by Michael Moore or attacks dead white guys...

Immagine... Speech codes, conduct codes, even a code that prohibits "Psycological" rape complete with punishment guidelines...

Ok now you are thinking what every college student lives at the public Universities of America.
Ahhhh diversity in our time!
I think there is a move afoot to make the new uniforms have Brown Shirts...

[mandalorian2298]

When it comes to banning books to prevent them from "corrupting our children with anti-christian ideas" etc. I am against it. I belive that my value system is simply to different from the value system of a person who would support that kind of censorship, that I don't see much point in discussing it.

"

I see your point and agree in freedom of information.. but kids in kindergarten should be learning to read and play, not why little Freddy has two Mommy's/ Daddy's. Save it until they're older. That's why films are rated R etc.

I agree. I consider myself to be as liberal as posible. Two consenting adults (or two horny teens ) can put whatever they want where ever they want to, as long as they close the curtains. But, in the matter of homosexuality, there is very few politicians who wan't to allow their citizans the basic right to BELIEVE WHAT EVER THEY WANT TO BELIEVE BECAUSE THAT IS THE HOLLY RIGHT OF EACH INDIVIDUAL!!!!!!!!! So, the political scene is (at least according my, limited, knowledge of American and European politics) is devided (with few, sane, exeptions on both sides) in two equaly irrational groups.
On one side we have the "GIVE ME BACK MY TORCH" group, who believs that anything that is not in, or can not be suported by their respective Holy Book (Bible, Kur'an, Tora or some other, depending on their personal religius belifs) is an evil attack on the faithfull, their religius rights etc. In my country (Croatia), at this point they begin to curse capitallism (becuse they think TV is spoiling their children) or communism (because, in Tweety's words, "They think they saw a Communist"
On the other side is the "LET'S PROMOTE HIPOCRACY " group also known as "LET'S TURN THE WORLD INTO ONE BIG PORN " group. This group insists that if an act is legal it is hence as good as any other act. And, since most people are such bigots that they DARE to claim that homosexuallity is unnaturall (because it's sooooooo obviusly natural ), the goverment should make it extra-shure that all the little kiddies learn that boy-on-boy (or girl-on-girl) love is a wonderfull thing. In fact, they probably want a law that forces every school and kindergarten to play AT LEAST one gay porn a week; and also want to switch the "Competition for Home Coming Queen" into a "Competition for Homo Coming Drag-Queen".

To summ-up, both these groups are annoying to me. So, if they keep it up, I am going to evict them from my planet

[Backglass]

But I ask again .. In kindergarten?? Move it to grade 6/7 where they teach them sex ed(in Canada). Then give them all the books they want, it just seems wrong as well to promote one teaching or book above another. Beyond that if they don't ask why tell??

Have you read these books? It's not sex-ed for kiddies. There is no sex. No two dads in the same bed, just as other childrens books wouldnt show a man & women in bed. They are just plain old childrens books with different characters...(at least the ones I have seen, and I have seen only one). I dont see how it would mean much of anything to my kids because they dont have two dads.

When I was a five I read a childrens book about china. It showed a chinese family, eating rice, working in fields, etc. It was like kindergarten geography. It didnt promote china or the chinese, or rice...it was just a childrens book and I learned that chinese (at the time) ate a lot of rice & rode bicycles. Pretty tame stuff, and it didnt cause me to want to move to china, just because I read that book as a child..

Wait a minute...I DO like Kung Po Chicken now.

I WAS BRAINWASHED BY THE LEFT! THOSE BASTARDS!

[mandalorian2298]

But I ask again .. In kindergarten?? Move it to grade 6/7 where they teach them sex ed(in Canada). Then give them all the books they want, it just seems wrong as well to promote one teaching or book above another. Beyond that if they don't ask why tell??

Have you read these books? It's not sex-ed for kiddies. There is no sex. No two dads in the same bed, just as other childrens books wouldnt show a man & women in bed. They are just plain old childrens books with different characters...(at least the ones I have seen, and I have seen only one). I dont see how it would mean much of anything to my kids because they dont have two dads.

When I was a five I read a childrens book about china. It showed a chinese family, eating rice, working in fields, etc. It was like kindergarten geography. It didnt promote china or the chinese, or rice...it was just a childrens book and I learned that chinese (at the time) ate a lot of rice & rode bicycles. Pretty tame stuff, and it didnt cause me to want to move to china, just because I read that book as a child..

Wait a minute...I DO like Kung Po Chicken now.

I WAS BRAINWASHED BY THE LEFT! THOSE BASTARDS!

Nah. It was an attempt from the Republicans to make you like Condoliza Rice Admit it...she turns you on ...you want to be her minister of kinkyness