It appears that the reasons were well supported on paper (and thanks for including some of the original article text). However, before all traces of skepticism can be erased, the following points should be addressed, hypothetically at least for the sake of completeness:
What was the "task force?" Who chose or appointed the "task force?" Who was eligible and included in the "task force" - parents, students, teachers, librarians, clergy, etc.?
Who determined the definition of "age appropriate," and who applied the definition to a student body of 4,500 students? It appears that the school board made the decision, not the task force, which harkens back to the original point of composition and control.
I can understand, if a majority of parents from a specific class objected to the book being studied as a lesson, it might be excluded from that class. I do not understand having the book(s) in question completely removed from the school library.
That's all from this keyboard. I disagree that removing the books from the library is not the same as book burning. If the book is no longer available it makes no difference where it went or how it was disposed. To remove the book from the library, aside from the question of using the book as study material, assumes that not one of the 4,500 students, many of high school age, are "age-appropriate" to the material. That is censorship by the school, the question of being "right or wrong" notwithstanding.
Back to my salty old Viet Nam war novel -- which no doubt would be censored by that school board as well, due to its realistically explicit language - language which would have been heard by young soldiers of high school age drafted in the 1960's and killed by the thousands during military service.
