Quote:
Originally Posted by Catlady
Judgment and context are everything, and if you can't recognize that, I guess you'd be happy with a computer program that would just willy-nilly count certain words and disallow anything over a specified number.
Judgment isn't censorship. Would you argue that a publisher MUST publish anything that comes in over the transom, because not doing so is censorship?
|
Actually, I would be more happy with just leaving the objectionable material available for sale. Nobody is requiring anybody buy it, or read it.
Judgment isn't censorship. Saying "other books have to meet these standards but my holy book doesn't"
is censorship. Once we avoid giving "holy books" a special free pass, we can make judgments based on the quality of each book, just as a publisher does when deciding what books to publish, and a customer does when deciding which books to buy.
But as I understand it, people are not advocating the removal of the books in question because they're painfully written, boring and incoherent--the sort of thing that would make them hard to publish.