Curtsy to Safelibraries:
Transcription of commentary:
A few weeks ago, the American Library Association announcedwith much fanfare that it was celebrating the ridiculous event called “Banned Books Week.” This announcement accused Americans of being “zealots and bigots who live in fear of discourse” and of being “screamers and book banners and book burners.” This Association arranged events and set up displays at libraries all over the country to pretend we have a problem with censorship.
The American Library Association puts out a list of books that it claims are being censored, which is a fraud because only government can engage in censorship and I assure you that our government is not censoring books. A so-called list of “banned books” was created by crying “censorship” anytime library patrons or parents of public school children complain about risque books being given to their children. The American Library Association claims that there were 186 cases of supposed censorship last year. But those were merely cases of ordinary people filing complaints with schools or libraries. Nearly all of these challenges to books took place at schools, and the rest of the complaints involved books available in the youth or children’s section of public libraries. These complaints had nothing to do with any book read by an[y] adult. These people accused of being “book banners” are just ordinary parents who want to limit their own children’s exposure to material they consider harmful or obscene.
Banned Books Week is not a celebration of free speech. It's a way for leftwing bureaucrats to bully ordinary citizens by stigmatizing those who complain with nasty names such as ‘bigots,’ ‘screamers,’ and ‘book burners’. The purpose is to intimidate parents from ever complaining about books that are given to their own children.
Listen to entire commentary HERE.
10 comments:
I don't publish comments in "fear" of anything, just FYI. Just choice, John. Choice.
As a proud member of ALA and a librarian, the efforts you led in your community are an attempt to censor.
I respect and applaud parents concerns about what their children read and view. What troubles me with these efforts is that people that try to get an item removed from a library, removed from TV, etc. are trying to decide what is appropriate for others.
If I want my children to view the books your group seeks to ban, then I make that choice for my children, not others.
No one if forcing you to check out those books for your children.
Same thing goes for all other forms of censorship. No one forces others to watch a movie that one wants banned.
I understand TV is different because one can innocently flip by a channel with questionable content using a remote. All together though, you still make the choice for what's appropriate for your children and seeking to remove it so no one has access makes absolutely no sense to me.
Chad,
If you truly understood the requests that were made, instead of liberal Library Journal misinformation, you would know that no books were ever targeted for removal. We did ask they be moved to the adult section, i.e., REmoved from the YA Zone. This has been, and continues to be, widely misconstrued by OIF and ALA supporters simply because they know they cannot win the battle when opening the door to inappropriate materials for minors.
We, as well, advocate strong parental involvement and guidance and agree with you wholeheartedly on that issue.
Thanks for your note.
I believe the problem, Ginny, is that trying to make you understand this issue is like yelling at a brick wall. Parents are perfectly capable of determining what is appropriate for their children. As this debate has dragged on, you have consistently stated that this literature is drastically distorting the thoughts of West Bend's young people. Yet you have been equally consistent at providing absolutely no evidence to support your case. You say kids are tainted by this material, but how often? You prove nothing, which is probably why your attempts go unnoticed. For example, I have used the West Bend Library since I moved here 10 years ago. I read high school level books by 2nd or 3rd grade, so I was constantly in the adult section. At no point in time did I feel disturbed or threatened or confused by the content I found in these sections. Where was it then, Ginny? Why isn't my life irreparably damaged because of this foul content? I can see only two reasons why: 1. its presence isn't a problem. 2. the "inapropriate" extent of the books that you are trying to move ends at a single mention of the words "homosexuality" or "sex", both of which are facts of life and tend not to do any damage to the human psyche. My point is, leave this issue (keep in mind I highly disagree it is a major issue at all) to the parents, don't take their responsibilites upon yourself. Trust me, it will help your stress levels in the long run.
Aaron, This is why I like your posts, my friend. You are generally respectful and you are persistent.
You forgot the third reason as to why you turned out to be such a well-versed, deep-thinking and concerned young person - prayer. I believe someone has been praying for you. :-)
I don't normally get involved in others comments but, honestly...
"...no books were ever targeted for removal."
I would like to avert your attention to your post when you wanted "The Perks of Being a Wallflower." banned. (http://wissup.blogspot.com/2009/02/west-bend-libary-issue-with-gay-books.html) "...we are requesting a "ban" on the The Perks of a Wallflower book."
Please, would you elaborate on why you're contradicting yourself with first "I want THIS book removed from the library!" then the next minute. "I don't want ANY books banned! Just moved to a different space!"
On a different note, I have noticed a lot of your books you try to "Move" have homosexual content, which, seems consistent in every book you try to "move" from Young Adult (Meaning 12 to 18 year olds) to the Adult section, or at least have a parental advisory sticker. Like "Boy Meets Boy" which isn't at ALL a horrible book. It only has one implied scene where one of the boys makes a joke to his friend about "ravishing" the boy on the table. (Which he never actually 'ravishes' him.) In my opinion, it's probably like if Disney made a Young Adult book about homosexuals.
On the homosexual note, I have one question referring to having the LGBT removed in the high school.
I have been informed that you home school your children, therefore they don't even go to that high school. Yet, you have them remove the LGBT Support Group through the guidance office. Also, you have had Safe Zone posters removed from the school walls because they supported homosexuality and not to make fun of others for it. (And other things like Race but from the gist I get you wanted them removed for supporting homosexuality.)
So, my question is this: Why would you have those two things removed from the high school if your children don't even go to that school?
That reminds me of the comment you made about the school's harassment policy about not making fun of others for their sexuality; that it was "Taking away their freedom of speech because it's a choice." So is religion, but you don't make a fuss about that. Also, how is being homosexual a choice? Either your born bisexual/homosexual or heterosexual. It's not your CHOICE to be gay or bisexual. It's implanted in you when you're in the womb. Everything is as simple as that.
Angel - I'm terribly sorry that you have received some misinformation. First and foremost, I do not home school my children. Was it me that "had" an LGBT support group disengaged? I remember asking a question about support groups that are taxpayer funded. I am a taxpayer. Whether my children attend WB East or West does not change that fact. Your school administration made the decision to "focus on drug and alcohol issues," according to an email I received from them in response. Please direct the question regarding removal of school support clubs to your school board or administration personnel. This applies to the Safe Zone posters you refer to, as well.
I appreciate your literary comments and, of course, respect your individual right to "like" or "dislike" reading material. It is incorrect to state that homosexual material "seems consistent in every book" we challenged. Please request a copy of the entire list through your local library; you will be able to see that there are mostly heterosexual books on the list.
I do not believe in book banning or book burning. I have stated in a previous post that we had asked for "The Perks" be "banned from the YA Zone. I have also stated publicly that it was an unfortunate choice of words. I apologize for that - again.
Your many questions at the end of your post reference a jumble of issues that do not necessary tie in with any library issues or the topic of this post.
I hope I have clarified. Thanks for writing!
Excuse me, if I may disagree with you, Ginny. Homosexuality has EVERYTHING to do with what you attempt to change, both within the library and the school. You target books with homosexual content, perhaps heterosexual as well, but your emphasis tends to be on the fact that homosexual content is available to young people. What's more, you publicly criticize LGBT groups at the high school and go even farther to discredit and monitor the actions of the teacher who is active in supporting LGBT teens at the schools. Please don't try to mislead people with your talk about not having anything to do with attempts to eradicate all homosexual support in West Bend, you actions speak much louder than your words.
Yes, Aaron, you may disagree. :-D
It is not a "secret" that I do not agree with LGBTQ clubs sponsored by taxpayer money. After all, if everyone's money pays for it, shouldn't everyone want it? If a club, however, is student-led off taxpayer time, this is perfectly within legal rights. I believe all the West Bend High School Gay/Lesbian/Queer/Transsexual/Bisexual/Questioning activities are held after school, is that right?
As for "monitoring" a teacher, do you have proof of this statement?
Just an FYI, Aaron, I do have a life. I have a husband, kids, grandkids, work, friendships, activities, hobbies, like most other people. My time is spent according to my priorities. Monitoring teachers is not one of them. Asking a question about a club does not constitute "monitoring" and, again, is perfectly within my rights as a taxpaying citizen. Of course, because it is a gay club for kids, the focus of others is the fact that the questions were asked at ALL. Is that not right?
Post a Comment