Quote:
Originally Posted by Aces4
We selected any book we wanted also, age appropriate. So how would Catcher in the Rye appeal to a third grader?
There are so many wonderful, educational, mind and character building books available for children under the age of eighteen. Why not allow access for the more mature subject matter after turning 18?
|
Allow access? As if access should be denied until the Govt chooses to allow it? That seems to be the opposite of how our Constitution is written: Govt stays out of the way until it can present a very good reason to interfere.
No books should be banned without a very good reason. Essentially, the written word should be considered speech and afforded first amendment protections. Parents can choose what comes into their homes, private businesses can choose what is discussed within their walls, social media companies can choose what topics are allowed, but Govt (schools, public libraries) should not be allowed to censor speech simply because they don't like the message.
What is wrong about choosing appropriate mind and character building books for children to read while preventing access to more mature material? I don't trust those who desire to force those choices on parents. Too often those who demand to control access to information use words like "indoctrination" and "target" in their justifications. I fear that their choice of "appropriate" books will train the next generation to be just as intolerant as they are. Not all books would be banned, only those with the "wrong" viewpoint. I would prefer that future generations learn about all viewpoints.