At one time the far religious right asked our public school system here in West Chester Ohio to remove the same list, the same books from their library shelves. Fortunately there was a huge hue and cry from informed peopleand it didn't happen. What a fuss it was. I hate, loathe, and despise this kind of censorship.

If this is true about Palin. We are done.

Besides this issue of what books she tried to ban, (I abhor censorship) is the fact that she was threatening the librarian if she did not do this. When there was a public outcry, Palin backed off and said it was just a "test of loyalty." What's that all about? Does anyone believe her. I for one do not! Seems as if George Orwell was just a shade off on 1984, should be 2008. It's sad.

Unfortunately we're not getting these answers from Palin. Again, can't wait for the debates.

Originally Posted by graciegirl

At one time the far religious right asked our public school system here in West Chester Ohio to remove the same list, the same books from their shelves. Fortunately there was a huge hue and cry from informed peopleand it didn't happen. What a fuss it was. I hate, loathe, dispise this kind of censorship.

If this is true about Palin. We are done.

I have got to get out of here. This thing is in my kitchen. GG I watched that one happen.

And

Sam,

What you are saying here about schools and required reading lists and your experience -- well I just have to comment on that and then I really will go clean some more.

What your board did I believe is excellent. You made it "optional" and you left it in the library. That is the perfect solution, in my book anyway, for how to handle things for school reading. Parents should have the right to make decisions for and with their own child. But not everybody else's.

I watched a censorship thing many years ago over "Of Mice and Men." I am a big fan of Steinbeck. Anyway, those who wanted the book banned just kept calling it "the cuss book." That's all they had to say. I almost began to feel sorry for them. "Of Mice and Men" stayed in the curriculum. The English teacher who did the defense was eloquent.

Sam, you did it right, girl. That's how it should be in a school. Choice. Not required. They don't want to read "Of Mice and Men, give them a choice. Maybe "The Red Pony." Still Steinbeck. But the horse did not cuss as I recall.

Boomer, still sounding a whole lot like Marian today

Tried to post this earlier, will try again

http://fightthepalinsmears.com/smear...red-librarian/

[Tony replaced full text with this link.]

Thanks, Boomer. I'm just shocked that sources on the internet says we banned the book.
If you have read the book, you know it is raw. I personally thought it was an incredible book. The SASD community was heavily Mennonite in 1992. The children of our community were still fairly sheltered during that time. I felt making the book optional gave our parents some control over what their children were exposed to in the classroom.

drr47 (Sigh) I'll say it one more time, Sarah Palin didn't fire the librarian, she THREATENED to fire the librarian, but back down due to public outcry.

Amongst this list of books are many I would want my children to read. Book banning is disgusting I don't care how you try to spin it.

I'm sure your demand to Senator Obama would be taken somewhat into consideration, if all The Republican sites decided to take off their numerous lies about him and his family.

From everything I could find, Palin never had a list per se. She asked that IF she wanted a book banned, would the librarian accede to her wishes. There was no mention of any specific book. So, why is this very old, outdated list even being published here (with a few new books added)? I remember seeing it when I was in school. Of course, I promptly got every book on the list and read it. About the only thing I really learned was that I didn't like Faulkner, D.H. Laurence liked women and I loved Steinbeck.

I remember reading Fahrenheit 451 and literally crying. The idea of burning a book just sickens me. Heck, I can't even dog ear a corner without feeling guilty. Tell me I can't read a book and I'll bet it will be in my hot little paws that same day and finished that night. I would probably be more willing to fight to the death the right to read what you want than any other freedom.

As I said previously, I sincerely hope that Paln's question was rhetorical. Unless and until we hear specifically from the librarian that Palin did in fact give her a list or that Palin admits that there were specific books she was considering having banned, this is an issue that should be put to the side. It is an important issue but we don't have enough facts to know what is true at this point.

I respect your opinions Chelsea, Sam, Redwitch and Boomer. I love your open and intelligent minds.

A couple aspects of this book banning kerfluffle seem to stick out above the partisan politics, the intrinsic fear of censorship, and the general chaos associated with anything in this forum of late.

I'm taking my impressions of the event from the newspaper article initially cited. May be wrong, but I got the impression that Palin asked the Librarian if there were procedures by which one (citizen, public official, anyone) could get books removed from the stack/list and if the city government under which the library worked could overrule the Librarian. I don't see where Palin or anyone else demanded that specific books be removed. I interpreted this as a exercise in determining boundaries.

Regarding Palin asking for the resignation of a number of city employees when she took office, I see no issue. Per the article, these people were all hired by her predecessor and some campaigned for him. Evidently, the jobs were not civil service but were patronage positions. Any new administration wants its own people in key suppport positions. Does a new president carry the cabinet of his predecessor, even of the same party? Loyalty test? No, I took that as the basic "Are you going to do your job and carry out the programs of the new administration or are you going to sabotage our efforts to make me look bad?"

Now regarding censorship --- this is more philosophical in nature. Everyone recoils at the thought on censorship, evoking images on Nazi book burnings, Fahrenheit 451, and those terribly serious movies of the 50's & 60's that had the small town power figure foaming at the mouth as he demanded the immediate destruction of Catcher in the Rye or Huckleberry Finn (and also outlawing rock and roll and dancing). But is censorship inherently evil? Too often today, the censors are a small group of religious nuts who want to impose their view on the community. Replace the foaming at the mouth tyrant and the religious nuts with a majority of concerned parents who want to remove, not To Kill a Mockingbird, but Terry Southern's Candy. Now personally I enjoyed the latter book, but I don't know if I'd want it on the shelves available to any horny 10 year old. But it is something that should likely be discussed and decided by the community. And what better example of democracy than to have the community decide what is acceptable to themselves. Sure, you will lose some you should win, at least temporarily. But in the long run, The Merchant of Venice and One Day in The Life of Ivan Denisovich will out.

Muncle.

It is much more than censorship.This hits a nerve with me as a concerned parent and grandparent and someone very interested and involved with education.....AND, I don't feel comfortable with Governor Palin's far right religious leanings.

I read so much here that is not open minded thinking. NO party will dictate what I think or make me believe that they are always right. To me that is a sickening kind of mind control.

I think you are missing the point here. Look at this quote from the paper:

"Palin might have become a household name in the last week, but Kilkenny, who is not a Palin fan, is on her own small path to Internet fame. She sent out an e-mail earlier this week to friends and family answering, from her perspective, the question Outsiders are asking any Alaskan they know: "Who is this Sarah Palin?"

Kilkenny's e-mail got bounced through cyberspace and ended up on news blogs. Now the small-town mom and housewife is scheduling interviews with national news media and got her name on the front page of The New York Times, even if it was misspelled."

Think a minute...what do you think Kilkenny's motive might be?

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Muncle.

It is much more than censorship.This hits a nerve with me as a concerned parent and grandparent and someone very interested and involved with education.....AND, I don't feel comfortable with Governor Palin's far right religious leanings.

I read so much here that is not open minded thinking. NO party will dictate what I think or make me believe that they are always right. To me that is a sickening kind of mind control.

Gracie,
What do you know of Palin's "far right religious leanings"? I don't know if she wants to impose sharia law. Now that would be far right. I have heard that she is against abortion and for premarital abstinence. I don't know if you consider these to be "far right" but they are tenets of the Catholic Church, despite what a lot of the cafeteria Catholics profess here. These beliefs are also held by a large number on mainline protestant religions as well as a large number of Jews. Radical, I think not. Any other fringe beliefs.

You regret that there is too much thinking that is not open minded, you say "here", but if I may, I'll address a wider spectrum. I believe one of the troubles with society is that there is too much open-mindedness, that people refuse to accept that some things are just wrong. We have become a society that is so concerned with inclusion
that we accept anything. We either refuse to or are incapable of making our own value judgments. We have adopted the philosophy that who am I to judge something or someone. They may have different values. That philosophy is :edit:. If something is wrong, it's wrong.

Originally Posted by Muncle

Gracie,
What do you know of Palin's "far right religious leanings"? I don't know if she wants to impose sharia law. Now that would be far right. I have heard that she is against abortion and for premarital abstinence. I don't know if you consider these to be "far right" but they are tenets of the Catholic Church, despite what a lot of the cafeteria Catholics profess here. These beliefs are also held by a large number on mainline protestant religions as well as a large number of Jews. Radical, I think not. Any other fringe beliefs.

You regret that there is too much thinking that is not open minded, you say "here", but if I may, I'll address a wider spectrum. I believe one of the troubles with society is that there is too much open-mindedness, that people refuse to accept that some things are just wrong. We have become a society that is so concerned with inclusion
that we accept anything. We either refuse to or are incapable of making our own value judgments. We have adopted the philosophy that who am I to judge something or someone. They may have different values. That philosophy is :edit:. If something is wrong, it's wrong.

Muncle.

You have again written a compelling argument. I am not "FOR" abortion but I do support legalized abortion. And although I think premarital abstinence is a good idea, a GREAT idea, I know that it is not a very realistic expectation in this day and age. My grandchildren have heard my talk about sex ad nauseum and I am forever saying that when you watch the Olympics and you see that huge stadium full of people, remember how they got here, and if you think you are heading for a sexual experience, use birth control. I think that you can't get enough sex education and unplanned pregnancies probably side track more lives than drugs.

I digress. You wouldn't like me. I am always digressing. My thinking on religion and morals is entirely different than when I was a child. But I do judge people. There are too many lazy people running around. Too many people that think they are entitled to every creature comfort and any big house and fancy appliance and then can't pay their bills. I judge people harshly that don't take dedicated good care of their family and don't take time out from their careers to raise their under five year olds.

I, like Boomer, should not type after midnight.

I need to get the hell out of this political forum. And stay out.

AND Muncle...I don't have a clue what Sharia law is.

I feel premenstrual. NOPE. That's not a possibility.

Originally Posted by samhass

Tal, I sat on the Souderton Area School Board during the entire "The Color Purple" debacle mentioned in your link. We did not ban the book "The Color Purple". This book was on a required reading list for our 10th graders. We had it removed from the required reading list but not banned from the high school library.
The SASD was a predominantly white school district in 1992. For many of our students, this book would have been their first look into the lives of African American families. I personally felt the book was a poor representation of the African American community as a whole. Kids at that age are so terribly impressionable. It dealt with incest and brutality. IMHO "To Kill A Mockingbird" was a better choice. I enjoined the NAACP to help me in my quest to remove the book from the sophomore required reading list. This book was not banned from our school library. It was simply replaced on the required reading list but remained as an optional selection .
That book was not banned. Your article is incorrect regarding SASD and The Color Purple.

Samhass you might want to contact this site's author and/or system operator to correct this http://title.forbiddenlibrary.com/

Originally Posted by Muncle

Gracie,
What do you know of Palin's "far right religious leanings"? I don't know if she wants to impose sharia law. Now that would be far right. I have heard that she is against abortion and for premarital abstinence. I don't know if you consider these to be "far right" but they are tenets of the Catholic Church, despite what a lot of the cafeteria Catholics profess here. These beliefs are also held by a large number on mainline protestant religions as well as a large number of Jews. Radical, I think not. Any other fringe beliefs.

You regret that there is too much thinking that is not open minded, you say "here", but if I may, I'll address a wider spectrum. I believe one of the troubles with society is that there is too much open-mindedness, that people refuse to accept that some things are just wrong. We have become a society that is so concerned with inclusion
that we accept anything. We either refuse to or are incapable of making our own value judgments. We have adopted the philosophy that who am I to judge something or someone. They may have different values. That philosophy is :edit:. If something is wrong, it's wrong.

Fair question Muncle. But the bigger question is what do we know about Sarah Palin at all? And now they are sequestering her from one on one interviews with the reporters that will ask her the really hard questions. That's just wrong. And it's a disservice to the American people.