Makes me ashamed to be from Johnston County

Therein lies the question. Who draws the line?

We all agree that a line has to be drawn (or "Kama Sutra" would be available in the elementary school library), but who draws it (and what happens if I don't like where the line is drawn)?.

 

Sadly, it usually ends up being those who have an "agenda". Sometimes the agenda is in line with the consensus of the local population....other times it is the "Agenda" of a special interest group which caters only to a select few who share a similar viewpoint.

In this case I think it is a gray area. Some say they are protecting children by removing the book in question...but it is a slippery slope. Using examples like Kama Sutra make it pretty easy since 99% of the population would probably agree it doesn't belong in the school. But the book in question is available in many schools through out the country. I doubt it was left on the library shelves by mistake everywhere.

I just hope we don't start removing every book a person has objected to.

 

Would we have a library left?

 

Knuckle- it will be a personal agenda b/c it will be who the board sets up to view the list & ban the books

this is where our rights & our childrens rights have now been taken from us

Like I said HIGH PROFILE attorney-good ole boy network sits on board-except for two & I can't speak about the new guy b/c I don't know him

This has been an up hill battle for years with the board

Not enough people go out & vote whent he terms come up so unless we ban together this will not change

 

Aye, there's the rub.

Whoever does it, it should not be done behind closed doors, which seems to be what happened in this case.

 

Using "Kama Sutra" as an example was for those who wanted to jump on the "Orwell", "Freedon of speech", "Book burning" band wagon. It's very easy to post that you don't believe in removing books from the library, until you become aware of just what some of those books might actually be.

Is this particular book as bad as "Kama Sutra"? I doubt it. But, as I have said earlier in this thread, the book was accused (and has not been denied) that it contained "sexual scenes", "profanity" and "drug use". These are topics I do not believe are appropriate for children.

 

Funny, the cited article doesn't mention that. Where do you get your information?

 

From same page as the cited article.

I realize the article says "before asking school employees to review ... " but I would guess the "school employees" probably took that as a strong suggestion from the body that decides whether to renew their contracts. They had, apparently, already reviewed the material and decided it was appropriate.

Directly below the quote I have inserted above is a section headed, "Why teachers support the book." That section is also interesting reading.

 

The argument I keep hearing from the liberal side is this:

1 - school kids are already immersed in sexual lust and immorality anyway, so what's the big deal.

2 - sure the school board was elected by the people, but I don't trust them and don't want to be bound by their decisions.

3 - a school library is the same as a public library and my child's rights are the same at both.

4 - My child's rights trump your rights to censor what your child reads.

The public education system in this country leans very hard to the left, so its not hard to see why younger generations are finding morality to be an increasingly vague concept. Keep it up ...public education will be its own undoing.

 

I think you misrepresent the argument. I think parents are very much concerned about the things that go on around their children; they don't believe children can be sheltered from everything; and they see certain materials as an opportunity to discuss their values with their children.

I don't trust any elected politician, of any political party. That's why I think their deliberations should be open to the public.

Who said that?

That's your opinion. Mine differs. But the likelihood of either of us changing the other's mind is pretty slim.

 

Are you suggesting that any book that contains any one of the three: profanity, sexual scenes, or drug use should be removed from a High School Library? I'm not talking about elementary school libraries...I'm talking High School.

If that is the case, how many great books would be removed from the libraries? Should they also be removed from public libraries as well since it is safe to assume children visit those locations as well?

Again....It is a slippery slope when a few individuals get to decide what is and is not appropriate. I think this process needs to be as transparent as possible to prevent any one group from "running the show".

This does not seem to be happening in this case...as grandma pointed out above:

 

Yes I am. Earlier I used a "rule of thumb" which seemed fair. If the book were made into a movie, what would it be rated. If the child could not see the movie in the theatre, they should not have the book available to them in the school library.

There should be restrictions in the libraries so that children cannot view books that are inappropriate.

You certainly wouldn't suggest that any book available in the public library should be made available to a school library, are you? Shall I again bring up "Kama Sutra"?

I get so tired of this "slippery slope" trash. I presume you are ok with making "Kama Sutra" available in the kindergartner library, right? What? You're not? Do you really want to start that slippery slope? First we block five year olds from viewing sexual [positions, what's next? Banning the Constitution?

It's not a "slippery slope". It's parents wanting to take control over what they want their children to be exposed to.

 

Why the attitude? The slippery slope "trash" you refer to is a legitimate concern. You shouldn't be so quick to dismiss such a concern out of hand.

I did not say 90% of what you presume I said in my post.

FWIW, I think the example you give of movie ratings to appropriateness to school libraries is terribly narrow minded. There are many great works of literature, fiction, non fiction and documentaries that could easily warrant an R or NC-17 rating if they were ever made into a movie. But that does not necessarily mean they should be removed from a school library.

"It's parents wanting to take control over what they want their children to be exposed to"

So what if all the parents don't agree? Des one parents concern warrant more weight than another? This is hardly a balck an white issue.

 

Funny, I've read an awful lot of Shakespere and I'm not aware of any "sex scenes". I know they were alluded to, and some potential, but were stopped before the movie version would have reached an "R" rating.

And, please. don't give me any of this "your twin pillows cry out for fluffing" as being a sex scene. I'm talking about stuff that, if made into a movie, would garner an "R" rating.

As far as Oedipus Rex, well that motherf----- can get gone. (Sorry, but you knowingly set it up. Had I not taken the bait, you would have thought less of me.)

 

Exactly.

I'm sure some parents would find the content of such books offensive. How many of us would support these books being reomved?

The rule of thumb movie analogy no matter how you bend it is a terrible example of how to decide which books are good for the library. Just becasue somebody has come up with a better way to do it on this forum doesn't make that way any less worse.

 

No, it's not for the reason that I stated. Just because you remove "Kama Sutra" from the elementary school library does not mean that next year (or ever) are they going to remove the Constitution.

"Slippery Slope" is a red herring.

Such as?

Nope, which is why we must work toward the least common denominator.

I seem to be repeating myself, did you read any of my previous posts?

 

So as long as the movie version is edited tho get a PG-13 rating it makes the grade? Any book to movie translation can be editied to remove profanity, sex, an violence. But that doesn't remove it from the source...the book. So if the book would get an R rating in its true unedited form, but the movie gets PG-13. How do you decide?

Maybe somebody should make a movie of the book in question and eliminate just enough of the sex and profanity to warrant a PG-13 rating (It wouldn't be too hard). Then they can start putting it back in the Library.

Hmmmm...Interesting

Again...the movie rating example is too flawed to warrant more discussion.

 

Ken has already given a few good examples.

 

This is a bit off topic, but working towards the least common denominator is why so many of today's school text books have been "dumbed down" for students who struggle with the subject matter. This is one of the reasons why we have children graduationg from High School who can only do math and read at the 6th grade level.

I don't know about you, but I'm not all that anxious for a "race to the bottom" aka finding the "least common denominator" when my child's education is in the balance.

just my .02

Ok, I don't know about the rest of you...but I have work to do.

Good Day!

 

I didn't ask devilock76, I asked you.

devilock76 did not supply specific examples (he did say "Titus Andronicus" was pushing it, but to tell you the truth, I don't remember that actually being the the school library.)

Aside from the previous joke about "Oedipus Rex", while the subject matter is questionable, there is nothing explicit in the work that would prevent it from being shown line for line in a movie which would gerner it any more than a PG-13 rating.

I simply, personally, don't like "Oedipus Rex" for the same reason I don't like liver. Because as a kid it was forced on me.