I'm going to try, once more, to back out of this. It is morphing into a speculative argument for and against the "R" word which is being applied, accurately or not, to the single person who apparently opened the censorship can. If, in fact, he was turned down, or not elected to the school board (perhaps because he home schools!?) then I still ask from whence commeth his influence. We have been warned by a moderator not to use this forum for P&R discussions, and I cannot see my way clear to continue without dipping into that water.
Let me back out by saying that there is no practical way you (we) can isolate our children from everything that is offensive to us as parents. I raised my daughters with the idea that they should be familiar with all manner of people; that no one person is necessarily 'better' than another; that use of offensive language was a personal opinion (after all they are just words) that may be distasteful to some but used transparently by others; that rape is not a sensual, sexual act, it is a horrible crime as it is treated in
Speak; that they should know what drugs are and what they do so they will know not to be involved in them when encountered; and that ultimately we all experience all of the distasteful aspects of human existence, and not knowing anything about them in advance is potentially harmful to someone who might possibly be asked or forced to make a quick decision regarding their use or avoidance. I also strongly believe that it is better for children to learn and discuss 'bad' things under the oversight of an adult than on the street from their peers.
Ultimately, at least for the kids now in the Republic school system, Scroggins has undermined his own good intentions with the huge wave of publicity that has rightfully arisen from this issue. Back to reading ...
