Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill14564
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.
|
So many holes in this… if all parents were paying attention or had an interest in what their minor children are being exposed to at school, these reading levels would be established for children and adults.
I’m thinking I am far more tolerant than you espouse to be since many of the social issues being addressed are within our extended family.
Did you and others ever question yourselves as to how you are able to function at this point without being subjected to all books available on the planet since first grade? Don’t you wonder how skewed your perspective is since you couldn’t read all books from age 6 to 18? (Do these books mean different things if read after the age of eighteen?)