Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey
The issue is one of one group of people people dictating what another group of people can and can't do in a public library. If they don't want their kids exposed to material of a sexual nature, then don't allow them to view or check out those materials. There's no need to ban those materials, because that then deprives access to those who wish to check them out.
|
You're assuming they're saying "nobody should be exposed to that" .
They might be saying "I don't want *my* kids to be exposed to that, until I say they're ready".
Instead of automatically assuming they want to tell everybody what to read, how about figuring out what they *really* want? Maybe they're using kids as an excuse to censor stuff, but what if they're sincerely looking for some control on what kids can do on their own? Parents can't oversee kids 24x7 or inside schools. What happened to "It takes a village..."?
It's not too different from saying liquor stores shouldn't let underage kids buy booze.
Would working with them be so terrible?
Like flagging books that might require a parental sign-off?
Maybe they're crackpot censors. But what if they aren't?