Banning books in schools (7 Viewers)

[Optimus Prime]

Excellent article I thought deserved its own thread
=========================

On the surface, it would appear that book censors and censored authors like myself can agree on one thing: Books are powerful.

Particularly books for children and teens.

Why else would people like me spend so much time and energy writing them?

Why else would censors spend so much time and energy trying to keep them out of kids’ hands?

In a country where the average adult is reading fewer and fewer books, it’s a surprise to find Americans arguing so much about them.

In this election year, parents and politicians — so many politicians — are jumping into the fray to say how powerful books can be.

Granted, politicians often make what I do sound like witchcraft, but I take this as a compliment.

I’ll admit, one of my first thoughts about the current wildfire of attempted censorship was: How quaint.

Conservatives seemed to be dusting off their playbook from 1958, when the only way our stories could get to kids was through schools and libraries.

While both are still crucial sanctuaries for readers, they’re hardly the only options. Plenty of booksellers supply titles that are taken off school shelves.

And words can be very widely shared free of charge on social media and the rest of the internet. If you take my book off a shelf, you keep it away from that shelf, but you hardly keep it away from readers.

As censorship wars have raged in so many communities, damaging the lives of countless teachers, librarians, parents and children, it’s begun to feel less and less quaint.

This is not your father’s book censorship…..

Here’s something I never thought I’d be nostalgic for: sincere censors. When my first novel, “Boy Meets Boy,” was published in 2003, it was immediately the subject of many challenges, some of which kept the book from ever getting on a shelf in the first place.

At the time, a challenge usually meant one parent trying to get a book pulled from a school or a library, going through a formal process.

I often reminded myself to try to find some sympathy for these parents; yes, they were wrong, and their desire to control what other people in the community got to read was wrong — but more often than not, the challenge was coming from fear of a changing world, a genuine (if incorrect) belief that being gay would lead kids straight to ruination and hell, and/or the misbegotten notion that if all the books that challenged the (homophobic, racist) status quo went away, then the status quo would remain intact.

It was, in some ways, as personal to them as it was to those of us on the other side of the challenge.

And nine times out of 10, the book would remain on the shelf.

It’s not like that now. What I’ve come to believe, as I’ve talked to authors and librarians and teachers, is that attacks are less and less about the actual books.

We’re being used as targets in a much larger proxy war.

The goal of that war isn’t just to curtail intellectual freedom but to eviscerate the public education system in this country.

Censors are scorching the earth, without care for how many kids get burned.

Racism and homophobia are still very much present, but it’s also a power grab, a money grab. The goal for many is a for-profit, more authoritarian and much less diverse culture, one in which truth is whatever you’re told it is, your identity is determined by its acceptability and the past is a lie that the future is forced to emulate.

The politicians who holler and post and draw up their lists of “harmful” books aren’t actually scared of our books.

They are using our books to scare people.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2022/09/23/standing-up-new-censorship/

 

[Optimus Prime]

School books about Martin Luther King Jr. are too “divisive,” claims a conservative group at the center of a Tennessee book ban battle. A story about the astronomer Galileo Galilei is “anti-church.” A picture book about seahorses is too sexy.

As the school year resumes, simmering fights over school books have returned to a boil. In some schools, like in Pennsylvania’s Central York School District this week, students have beaten back bans on books about racism.

But elsewhere, like in Tennessee’s Williamson County School District, the battle is ongoing, bolstered by new state laws that ban the teaching of certain race-related topics.

At the heart of that fight is a conservative group, led by a private-school parent, that has a sprawling list of complaints against common classroom books. Many of the books are about race, but other targets include dragons, sad little owls, and hurricanes……

With school back in session, the Williamson County feud has been renewed, Reuters reportedthis week. And the scope of the proposed book ban is even broader and loonier than MFL’s June letter suggests.

Accompanying that letter is an 11-page spreadsheet with complaints about books on the district’s curriculum, ranging from popular books on civil rights heroes to books about poisonous animals (“text speaks of horned lizard squirting blood out of its eyes”), Johnny Appleseed (“story is sad and dark”), and Greek and Roman mythology (“illustration of the goddess Venus naked coming out of the ocean...story of Tantalus and how he cooks up, serves, and eats his son.”)

A book about hurricanes is no good (“1st grade is too young to hear about possible devastating effects of hurricanes”) and a book about owls is designated as a downer. (“It’s a sad book, but turns out ok. Not a book I would want to read for fun,” an adult wrote of the owl book in the spreadsheet.)….

In addition to broadsides against books about King and Bridges, the list takes a dim view of multiple books about Native Americans. One, The Rough-Face Girl, is deemed inappropriate because it includes an illustration of the protagonist bathing “with her hair covering her chest.” The book First Nations of North America: Plains Indians is also a no-no, because it “paints white people in a negative light.”

Multiple books that contain Spanish or French Creole words receive warnings from the group for potentially “confusing” children. An article about crackdowns on civil rights demonstrators, meanwhile, is deemed inappropriate for “negative view of Firemen and police.” A fictional book about the Civil War (given to fifth graders) is deemed inappropriate, in part due to depictions of “out of marriage families between white men and black women” and descriptions of “white people as ‘bad’ or ‘evil.’”

At one juncture, the group implores the school district to include more charitable descriptions of the Catholic Church when teaching a book about astronomer Galileo Galilei, who was persecuted by said church for suggesting that Earth revolves around the sun.

“Where is the HERO of the church?” the group’s spreadsheet asks, “to contrast with their mistakes? There are so many opportunities to teach children the truth of our history as a nation. The Church has a huge and lasting influence on American culture. Both good and bad should be represented. The Christian church is responsible for the genesis of Hospitals, Orphanages, Social Work, Charity, to name a few.”…….

Far-Right Group Wants to Ban Kids From Reading Books on Male Seahorses, Galileo, and MLK

Moms for Liberty is raising hell in a Tennessee school district over books that teach about race in American history—and also books that teach about wild animals and science.

www.thedailybeast.com

 

[Snarky Sack]

School books about Martin Luther King Jr. are too “divisive,” claims a conservative group at the center of a Tennessee book ban battle. A story about the astronomer Galileo Galilei is “anti-church.” A picture book about seahorses is too sexy.

As the school year resumes, simmering fights over school books have returned to a boil. In some schools, like in Pennsylvania’s Central York School District this week, students have beaten back bans on books about racism.

But elsewhere, like in Tennessee’s Williamson County School District, the battle is ongoing, bolstered by new state laws that ban the teaching of certain race-related topics.

At the heart of that fight is a conservative group, led by a private-school parent, that has a sprawling list of complaints against common classroom books. Many of the books are about race, but other targets include dragons, sad little owls, and hurricanes……

With school back in session, the Williamson County feud has been renewed, Reuters reportedthis week. And the scope of the proposed book ban is even broader and loonier than MFL’s June letter suggests.

Accompanying that letter is an 11-page spreadsheet with complaints about books on the district’s curriculum, ranging from popular books on civil rights heroes to books about poisonous animals (“text speaks of horned lizard squirting blood out of its eyes”), Johnny Appleseed (“story is sad and dark”), and Greek and Roman mythology (“illustration of the goddess Venus naked coming out of the ocean...story of Tantalus and how he cooks up, serves, and eats his son.”)

A book about hurricanes is no good (“1st grade is too young to hear about possible devastating effects of hurricanes”) and a book about owls is designated as a downer. (“It’s a sad book, but turns out ok. Not a book I would want to read for fun,” an adult wrote of the owl book in the spreadsheet.)….

In addition to broadsides against books about King and Bridges, the list takes a dim view of multiple books about Native Americans. One, The Rough-Face Girl, is deemed inappropriate because it includes an illustration of the protagonist bathing “with her hair covering her chest.” The book First Nations of North America: Plains Indians is also a no-no, because it “paints white people in a negative light.”

Multiple books that contain Spanish or French Creole words receive warnings from the group for potentially “confusing” children. An article about crackdowns on civil rights demonstrators, meanwhile, is deemed inappropriate for “negative view of Firemen and police.” A fictional book about the Civil War (given to fifth graders) is deemed inappropriate, in part due to depictions of “out of marriage families between white men and black women” and descriptions of “white people as ‘bad’ or ‘evil.’”

At one juncture, the group implores the school district to include more charitable descriptions of the Catholic Church when teaching a book about astronomer Galileo Galilei, who was persecuted by said church for suggesting that Earth revolves around the sun.

“Where is the HERO of the church?” the group’s spreadsheet asks, “to contrast with their mistakes? There are so many opportunities to teach children the truth of our history as a nation. The Church has a huge and lasting influence on American culture. Both good and bad should be represented. The Christian church is responsible for the genesis of Hospitals, Orphanages, Social Work, Charity, to name a few.”…….

Far-Right Group Wants to Ban Kids From Reading Books on Male Seahorses, Galileo, and MLK

Moms for Liberty is raising hell in a Tennessee school district over books that teach about race in American history—and also books that teach about wild animals and science.

www.thedailybeast.com

We really need to see the books in question to know whether complaints about them are valid or not. Just because a book is "about Martin Luther King Jr." doesn't mean that the book itself is as virtuous and right-minded as Dr. King himself.

What if a book focused on the FBI psyop that tried to force King to commit suicide? What if that book related that FBI operation to Peter Strzok's Operation We'll Stop It, and to the ongoing We'll Stop It 2.0? Is that a good book for kids because it is about MLK? What if the book presented FBI disinformation about King having affairs as fact? Give it an honored place on the MLK day display?

Not saying that is what the book in question is about. Since we are not told which book it is, we can only guess.

We need links to the books themselves. That Daily Beast article has links, but not to the books. I thought 'how can seahorses be sexy?' but when I clicked on the link, it was an article about seahorses and their contribution to computers, not about any sexy seahorse book.

This is typical of the kind of thing that progressives read and rarely apply critical thinking to. The typical prog will read about a third of what you posted, and come away with their bias confirmed that anyone who questions any book in any library is a right wing nutjob.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

We need links to the books themselves. That Daily Beast article has links, but not to the books. I thought 'how can seahorses be sexy?' but when I clicked on the link, it was an article about seahorses and their contribution to computers, not about any sexy seahorse book.

This is typical of the kind of thing that progressives read and rarely apply critical thinking to. The typical prog will read about a third of what you posted, and come away with their bias confirmed that anyone who questions any book in any library is a right wing nutjob.

There is a certain irony to this. You say you need a link to the book itself, which makes sense. People should judge for themselves and I agree. However, for all of your crap about "[t]he typical prog will read about a third of what you posted, and come away with their bias confirmed", you would have actually seen that they gave the name of the book and the passage in question further down the article. If you had read it, you would have seen it.

 

[Snarky Sack]

There is a certain irony to this. You say you need a link to the book itself, which makes sense. People should judge for themselves and I agree. However, for all of your crap about "[t]he typical prog will read about a third of what you posted, and come away with their bias confirmed", you would have actually seen that they gave the name of the book and the passage in question further down the article. If you had read it, you would have seen it.

I read the part that Optimus pasted. For some reason "Daily Beast" is a pay site, and I'm just a hardworking schoolteacher so I don't have money to spend on those. What is the name of the book, and I will be happy to research it. If you want to share the passage, I'll be happy to read it.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I read the part that Optimus pasted. For some reason "Daily Beast" is a pay site, and I'm just a hardworking schoolteacher so I don't have money to spend on those. What is the name of the book, and I will be happy to research it. If you want to share the passage, I'll be happy to read it.

Daily Beast is not a paysite. I can see all of their articles and I have never given them money.

Edit: Didn't mean to post yet. This is from the article:

Readers looking for a Kama Sutra of seahorse sex will be disappointed. Sea Horse: The Shyest Fish In The Sea contains nothing more risqué than watercolor illustrations of two seahorses holding tails or touching bellies (never—heavens—at the same time).

The passage that “describes how they have sex” reads: “they twist their tails together and twirl gently around, changing color until they match. Sea horses are faithful to one mate and often pair up for life. Today Sea Horse’s mate is full of ripe eggs. The two of them dance until sunset and then she puts her eggs into his pouch. Barbour sea horses mate every few weeks during the breeding season. Only the male sea horse has a pouch. Only the female sea horse can grow eggs.”

 

[Snarky Sack]

Daily Beast is not a paysite. I can see all of their articles and I have never given them money.

You're right. here's what I got when I clicked on the links:

Free if you register. I'll pass, but you were correct.

Edit: Didn't mean to post yet. This is from the article:

Readers looking for a Kama Sutra of seahorse sex will be disappointed. Sea Horse: The Shyest Fish In The Sea contains nothing more risqué than watercolor illustrations of two seahorses holding tails or touching bellies (never—heavens—at the same time).

The passage that “describes how they have sex” reads: “they twist their tails together and twirl gently around, changing color until they match. Sea horses are faithful to one mate and often pair up for life. Today Sea Horse’s mate is full of ripe eggs. The two of them dance until sunset and then she puts her eggs into his pouch. Barbour sea horses mate every few weeks during the breeding season. Only the male sea horse has a pouch. Only the female sea horse can grow eggs.”

If the book is as they describe it, I would not oppose it. Apparently, they are pretty close. Here are the pages that likely gave offense (from a Youtube read aloud):

I

I don't see anything offensive about that. But not every parent/taxpayer/voter has to think like I do about what books should be in the library. They can have a voice in how their children are educated and how their money is spent, whether you are I agree with what they say or not.

I don't understand why the left feels it has to write so many articles about parents expressing opinions.

 

[brandon]

You're right. here's what I got when I clicked on the links:

Free if you register. I'll pass, but you were correct.

If the book is as they describe it, I would not oppose it. Apparently, they are pretty close. Here are the pages that likely gave offense (from a Youtube read aloud):

I

I don't see anything offensive about that. But not every parent/taxpayer/voter has to think like I do about what books should be in the library. They can have a voice in how their children are educated and how their money is spent, whether you are I agree with what they say or not.

I don't understand why the left feels it has to write so many articles about parents expressing opinions.

Because those who believe this to be offensive are attempting to dictate to those who don’t who can read these books by attempting to have them removed from the shelves.

If you can see how people can have very different opinions about whether or not these books are offensive, don’t you think each parent should have the choice about whether or not their child should be able to read these books?

The only way to give every parent choice is to allow the book to be in the library, and let the parent decide if their child can take the book home or not.

 

[Snarky Sack]

Because those who believe this to be offensive are attempting to dictate to those who don’t who can read these books by attempting to have them removed from the shelves!

As you would do, if you found a book to be offensive. If there was a book that denied the holocaust, or reported the MLK adultry FBI disinformation as factual, or showed the KKK to be heroes as the movie "Birth of a Nation" did, you would have no trouble saying, "I want that book removed from the shelves."

If you can see how people can have very different opinions about whether or not these books are offensive, don’t you think each parent should have the choice about whether or not their child should be able to read these books?

Yes, if it were the parents' choice and not just the school's and the librarian's choice. If the library stocks a book, and the child checks it out or reads it in the library, each parent has zero choice.

The only way to give every parent choice is to allow the book to be in the library, and let the parent decide if their child can take the book home or not.

How do parents monitor that?

Before you even answer that, answer this: I'm sure you and I agree that the "sexy seahorse" book is not at all offensive - to us. If a parent is truly offended by that book, should they have the ability to prevent their child from reading it?

Because unless you want to set up a system in which every parent approves every book before it is given to their child, we have to have a way for parents, taxpayers, and voters, to have input on which books are available to all children. Luckily, we have such a system, it is called free speech and democracy.

The democracy slows things down sometimes, and the free speech makes board members uncomfortable sometimes, but I want to keep them both.

 

[Optimus Prime]

We really need to see the books in question to know whether complaints about them are valid or not. Just because a book is "about Martin Luther King Jr." doesn't mean that the book itself is as virtuous and right-minded as Dr. King himself.

What if a book focused on the FBI psyop that tried to force King to commit suicide?

Yes, because that’s what MLK books written for 3rd graders cover

 

[Snarky Sack]

Yes, because that’s what MLK books written for 3rd graders cover

It was a hypothetical, Optimus.

Such a book would never be an issue, because the librarians censor any book that they disagree with. Nobody seems to complain about that.

 

[Dragon]

As you would do, if you found a book to be offensive. If there was a book that denied the holocaust, or reported the MLK adultry FBI disinformation as factual, or showed the KKK to be heroes as the movie "Birth of a Nation" did, you would have no trouble saying, "I want that book removed from the shelves."

Yes, if it were the parents' choice and not just the school's and the librarian's choice. If the library stocks a book, and the child checks it out or reads it in the library, each parent has zero choice.

How do parents monitor that?

Before you even answer that, answer this: I'm sure you and I agree that the "sexy seahorse" book is not at all offensive - to us. If a parent is truly offended by that book, should they have the ability to prevent their child from reading it?

Because unless you want to set up a system in which every parent approves every book before it is given to their child, we have to have a way for parents, taxpayers, and voters, to have input on which books are available to all children. Luckily, we have such a system, it is called free speech and democracy.

The democracy slows things down sometimes, and the free speech makes board members uncomfortable sometimes, but I want to keep them both.

Why should ONE parent decide that the children of hundreds of other parents cant read a book? If they are so scared of what they might read, then they should make sure that their children can only go to the library accompanied by a parent, To let a small minority dictate what the majority of kids and adults can read is are the way of totalitarian regimes not a democracy

 

[Snarky Sack]

Why should ONE parent decide that the children of hundreds of other parents cant read a book? If they are so scared of what they might read, then they should make sure that their children can only go to the library accompanied by a parent, To let a small minority dictate what the majority of kids and adults can read is are the way of totalitarian regimes not a democracy

There is selectivity in all libraries. Library space is limited, especially in a school library. The question is who will do the selecting. Parents should not be cut out of that process.

 

[MT15]

There is selectivity in all libraries. Library space is limited, especially in a school library. The question is who will do the selecting. Parents should not be cut out of that process.

Okay, I think this is progress. How many parents objecting should it take to remove a book and deny it to everyone?

 

[Snarky Sack]

Okay, I think this is progress. How many parents objecting should it take to remove a book and deny it to everyone?

I think both the number of parents objecting, the intensity of the objections, and also the ability of the parents objecting to convince other parents that their objections are valid, should all come into play. I think that the school board has to take into account how reasonable any parents' objection is, and can measure that in part by how other parents react.

If one parent raises an objection, and is unable to convince any other parents about the need to remove a book, that will indicate that the objection is not considered valid by the parents of that school district. The board members can defend the shelving of the book and not lose their place in the next election.

If one parent raises an objection, and then several other parents take the objection and run with it, convincing others as they go, it would be foolish for the board members to say "we don't bow to book burners," or "I guess you ignorant people just hate books!"

Doesn't have to be every single parent, or even a majority. Suppose there is a book about Scotish history, and the ten percent of a community that is of the MacGregor Clan object to it strongly and vocally, while the other Scots and non-Scots in the community don't see a problem, the board members can say "I'll go with the ninety percent."

But . . . those who object so strongly will likely vote in the next election based on that one issue. So the board members would be wise to ask whether the ninety percent are going to stand behind them for not banning the book, or if they will vote on other issues in an even split making the ten percent an important block.

The school board members are welcome to campaign on a platform of refusing all requests for books to be removed from the library if they think that is a better strategy than responding to parent concerns. Seriously, in some communities, that would go over well.

That's how democracy and free speech work on many issues. No reason to say that book choices by a school librarian are somehow too sacred for that process.

 

[MT15]

Okay. Let’s do a thought experiment. But it will require honest introspection. Here goes.

What if a parent objected to a technique or teaching method you use in your profession? Let‘s say it isn’t necessarily about their child, but a proven technique that you were taught and have been using successfully is something they don’t like. They convince 10% of the parents in the school corp that they are correct.

Would you immediately abandon that technique or teaching method? Without even trying to defend it? Would that make you a bit salty that people who don’t know your profession like you do are deciding what techniques or teaching methods work and which ones don’t?

Or would you think, why should all of the kids in my class lose the benefit of that teaching technique because 10% of parents don’t like it?

 

[Snarky Sack]

Okay. Let’s do a thought experiment. But it will require honest introspection. Here goes.

What if a parent objected to a technique or teaching method you use in your profession? Let‘s say it isn’t necessarily about their child, but a proven technique that you were taught and have been using successfully is something they don’t like. They convince 10% of the parents in the school corp that they are correct.

Would you immediately abandon that technique or teaching method? Without even trying to defend it? Would that make you a bit salty that people who don’t know your profession like you do are deciding what techniques or teaching methods work and which ones don’t?

Or would you think, why should all of the kids in my class lose the benefit of that teaching technique because 10% of parents don’t like it?

Good question.

First of all, no it would not make me salty if parents objected to a technique or teaching method I use in my profession. I don't usually bring this up, but I have two Masters degrees, one in Special Education and one in Ed Psych, so I am overqualified compared to many teachers. But that doesn't mean that parents don't have a right to input in how I teach their kids.

Second, I would not immediately abandon that technique or teaching method.

This is not as hypothetical as you might think. I have often had parents offer advice on a method that they read about or saw on TV, that they thought I should use or try. I can't remember a parent objecting to a teaching method, but I did have a student object to one, based on their religion.

Here is how I would proceed:

I would talk to the parent and get as much information as they could share about why a particular teaching method is objectionable to them. If they read it somewhere or saw it somewhere, I would make the effort to see what they saw. Maybe they are getting some good information I didn't know about.

Suppose I concluded that they were just wrong, and that whoever created what they saw is a charlatan and is flat wrong. I would explain this to them, and give my reasons. But I would also tell them that I'm not the final authority at the school, and we could sit down and talk to the principal, or they could go to the principal on their own if they preferred. They might decide to take it to their elected school board instead, as would be their right.

No matter how wrong I thought them, I would treat them with the respect due the taxpayers who pay my salaries and the parents of the children I am privileged to teach. I would never tell my fellow teachers, "who do these people think they are telling me how to teach? Did you see the dirt under that dad's fingernails? What is he a wrench monkey, or a ditch digger? I guess they just hate education. You can tell by the way that tatted up mom talks that they don't have any themselves."

 

[MT15]

Good question.

First of all, no it would not make me salty if parents objected to a technique or teaching method I use in my profession. I don't usually bring this up, but I have two Masters degrees, one in Special Education and one in Ed Psych, so I am overqualified compared to many teachers. But that doesn't mean that parents don't have a right to input in how I teach their kids.

Second, I would not immediately abandon that technique or teaching method.

This is not as hypothetical as you might think. I have often had parents offer advice on a method that they read about or saw on TV, that they thought I should use or try. I can't remember a parent objecting to a teaching method, but I did have a student object to one, based on their religion.

Here is how I would proceed:

I would talk to the parent and get as much information as they could share about why a particular teaching method is objectionable to them. If they read it somewhere or saw it somewhere, I would make the effort to see what they saw. Maybe they are getting some good information I didn't know about.

Suppose I concluded that they were just wrong, and that whoever created what they saw is a charlatan and is flat wrong. I would explain this to them, and give my reasons. But I would also tell them that I'm not the final authority at the school, and we could sit down and talk to the principal, or they could go to the principal on their own if they preferred. They might decide to take it to their elected school board instead, as would be their right.

No matter how wrong I thought them, I would treat them with the respect due the taxpayers who pay my salaries and the parents of the children I am privileged to teach. I would never tell my fellow teachers, "who do these people think they are telling me how to teach? Did you see the dirt under that dad's fingernails? What is he a wrench monkey, or a ditch digger? I guess they just hate education. You can tell by the way that tatted up mom talks that they don't have any themselves."

So why on earth do you think that a single parent (or even 10%) should override both the professional judgement of librarians (who have just as much education as you do in their own field) and the 90% of parents who would prefer that these books shouldn’t be removed?

I’m sure you’re aware that the particular groups that are campaigning against books haven’t exactly been rational about it? And it has nothing to do with what they do for a living or whether they have tattoos or not. More often than not, these are folks who spend a great deal of time online and are seeing scare videos on FB or YouTube and they are whipped into an emotional frenzy.

I’ve seen school board meeting videos where librarians and LBGTQ teachers get called groomers and pedophiles. Where people yell and scream at school board members, teachers and administrators. They are getting death threats. This whole groomer / pedophile stuff reminds me of the big day care Satanic scandals of years ago. Lives are being ruined over this and it’s little more than mass hysteria. It’s even worse because the internet today allows this stuff to balloon very quickly.

I would never say that parents don’t deserve to have input, that would be crazy. But we have to be rational about it. The true story of 2 male penguins who bonded at a zoo and raised some chicks together isn’t grooming children. Nor is the story of how seahorses have babies. The story of Billie Jean King isn’t endangering kids, nor is the story of Wilma Rudolph or Roberto Clemente. All have been targeted by parents.

 

[Snarky Sack]

So why on earth do you think that a single parent (or even 10%) should override both the professional judgement of librarians (who have just as much education as you do in their own field) and the 90% of parents who would prefer that these books shouldn’t be removed?

For the reasons that I explained. It's part of our democracy that small groups of one-issue voters can have a lot of sway, versus people who may be apathetic or only mildly oppose them on that issue. That happens a lot within the Democratic Party, FWIW, IMO.

If a parent strongly believes that kids should have access to say, Huck Fynn, they can argue that also and try to get other parents on their side. Me, I believe that Huck Fynn is a great American book, and that all kids should read it after a proper introduction and explanation of certain aspects which educators and librarians are fully capable of providing.

But, if an African-American parent strongly opposes it being available to their child, due to the racial slurs it contains, I'm certainly not going to tell them how to parent. I don't care if the parent never got past 3rd grade, they know their kids' needs better than I do.

I’m sure you’re aware that the particular groups that are campaigning against books haven’t exactly been rational about it? And it has nothing to do with what they do for a living or whether they have tattoos or not. More often than not, these are folks who spend a great deal of time online and are seeing scare videos on FB or YouTube and they are whipped into an emotional frenzy.

That is your personal attack on people whose opinions differ from yours.

I’ve seen school board meeting videos where librarians and LBGTQ teachers get called groomers and pedophiles. Where people yell and scream at school board members, teachers and administrators. They are getting death threats.

Anyone in public life gets death threats. All of the screaming I've seen has taken place when school board members suddenly shut speech down. That's what happens, when elected official try to silence their own voters. You are watching too much outrage porn instead of listening to parents who want to have input in their kids educations.

This whole groomer / pedophile stuff reminds me of the big day care Satanic scandals of years ago. Lives are being ruined over this and it’s little more than mass hysteria. It’s even worse because the internet today allows this stuff to balloon very quickly.

Oh, whose life is being ruined? Name a teacher who was accused of being a pedophile unfairly and had their life ruined. Not saying it never happens, but there has been no sharp increase due to parents wanting to have a say in the books their kids are given.

I would never say that parents don’t deserve to have input, that would be crazy.

It sounds like you are saying exactly that, if you disagree with the input.

But we have to be rational about it. The true story of 2 male penguins who bonded at a zoo and raised some chicks together isn’t grooming children. Nor is the story of how seahorses have babies. The story of Billie Jean King isn’t endangering kids, nor is the story of Wilma Rudolph or Roberto Clemente. All have been targeted by parents.

Yes, and they are items for discussion, not shutting down of discussion. Why is the left afraid to just make its case rather than seeking to shut down the debate?