Missouri public school bans Kurt Vonnegut's 'Slaughterhouse Five'.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Banning books because of religion is bad. If a person requests that a book should be removed because of religious reasons, nobody should take it seriously. It doesn't really matter if that was just an excuse.

But that's kind of what I was trying to bring up, was that it may be common that a person may mask their religious motives with something nonreligious, because quite often people (even if they are religious) will fight them if they state that religion is the reason. It makes their claims seem more legitimate.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

But that's kind of what I was trying to bring up, was that it may be common that a person may mask their religious motives with something nonreligious, because quite often people (even if they are religious) will fight them if they state that religion is the reason. It makes their claims seem more legitimate.

But the religious motives of the initial claim weren't covered by something rational, and they were still taken seriously.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

But the religious motives of the initial claim weren't covered by something rational, and they were still taken seriously.

May be because they were brought to someone of the same belief. In this case, the district admin seemed to want to push this through. Why else would he ignore the findings of the committee he created? Why else would there be no information available on who was on the second committee (the one that voted unanimously against the books)?

[GlennD]

Originally Posted by Skibble

Apologies; I didn't mean to imply that I felt this particular case was handled properly. It absolutely wasn't. (Although, for the reasons stated above, I would still hesitate to call the result a true ban.)

I was merely trying to give some insight into how it is normally done, and how often, as the discussion seemed to be as much about the general practice of removing books from schools as it was this specific case.

I disagree with you on this; I think it was handled in a very appropriate way. Rather than open the door to individually coming up with standards every time someone complains about a book, they spent their time building a list of criteria for future decisions. Now, if a parent complains about a book, they will be responsible to explain which part of the district standards the book violates - they'll need to be more specific rather than just "it's offensive". By the same token, if the community disagrees with the standards the district put in place, they can discuss that list of criteria rather than having a book-banning argument every time a new book comes up.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by mldavis2

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,"

All good questions.

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.

No, it assumes that school libraries have limited resources and limited physical space, and cannot afford to have a book that's only appropriate and helpful to one or two students; they have to pick books that have appeal to a broad selection of the student body.

How many books should they carry that are inappropriate for 95% of the students at the school? How many widely-useful books should be skipped because that space on the shelf is filled by something that only a handful of students will ever read? Even with nonzero answers, it's obvious that getting rid of books for controversial content may not be censorship; it could just be that the library can get better use out of that space with a book that's accessible to more students.

That said--I think it likely that, in this case, "age-appropriate" is a code phrase for "doesn't make adults uncomfortable to think of kids reading it." Which is a very different standard from actual age appropriateness.

[anamardoll]

I will only believe the "age-appropriate" cover story if the Christian Bible was also removed from the school library. (Yes, I'm assuming it's available there. I may be assuming that incorrectly.)

I haven't read Slaughterhouse Five. (This thread has caused me to buy it, though.) But I will bet there is NOTHING in there that is (a) age-inappropriate for teenagers AND (b) missing from the Bible.

[GlennD]

As far as I'm aware, my high school library did not have a copy of the Bible. I'll have to ask my daughter to check her library after school starts.

[HomeInMyShoes]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

No, it assumes that school libraries have limited resources and limited physical space, and cannot afford to have a book that's only appropriate and helpful to one or two students; they have to pick books that have appeal to a broad selection of the student body.

That's a lot of game review magazines and television guides.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

May be because they were brought to someone of the same belief. In this case, the district admin seemed to want to push this through. Why else would he ignore the findings of the committee he created? Why else would there be no information available on who was on the second committee (the one that voted unanimously against the books)?

And that person should be fired, or this will happen again.

[GlennD]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

May be because they were brought to someone of the same belief. In this case, the district admin seemed to want to push this through. Why else would he ignore the findings of the committee he created? Why else would there be no information available on who was on the second committee (the one that voted unanimously against the books)?

I just reread the original article with your post in mind.....where does it talk about the superintendant ignoring the findings of a committee? Or creating a second committee?

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by GlennD

I disagree with you on this; I think it was handled in a very appropriate way. Rather than open the door to individually coming up with standards every time someone complains about a book, they spent their time building a list of criteria for future decisions. Now, if a parent complains about a book, they will be responsible to explain which part of the district standards the book violates - they'll need to be more specific rather than just "it's offensive". By the same token, if the community disagrees with the standards the district put in place, they can discuss that list of criteria rather than having a book-banning argument every time a new book comes up.

Yes, parts were handled appropriately, but parts were not. Why did the admin feel the need to have a second committee decide the matter when the original committee found that there was nothing wrong with the books? Why was it never released who was on the second committee?

Originally Posted by GlennD

I just reread the original article with your post in mind.....where does it talk about the superintendant ignoring the findings of a committee? Or creating a second committee?

Let me try and find it. Was mentioned in one article I read (which was not the one originally linked), and I thought that someone else here mentioned it as well.

[GlennD]

I don't see anything in the article about ANY committees? The decision was made by four members of the school board (with 3 members absent) and two administrators.

edit: ok, now I see what you're referring to - I skimmed over post 188 in this thread, referring to the comments section of the original article.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

Let me try and find it. Was mentioned in one article I read (which was not the one originally linked), and I thought that someone else here mentioned it as well.

I found it in the comments. The one who posted about it mentioned another article.

[CleverClothe]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

But that's kind of what I was trying to bring up, was that it may be common that a person may mask their religious motives with something nonreligious, because quite often people (even if they are religious) will fight them if they state that religion is the reason. It makes their claims seem more legitimate.

This is exactly what I was thinking. I think EatingPie is just unfamiliar with how religious conservatives act. My father grew up in a very conservative family (I'm sure my grandmother would disown us if she knew we have been going to a church that allows women to speak in front of the congregation and even plays instrumental music!). Luckily for me, he learned the error of those ways and raised me better.

The religious conservatives are very good at word games. They have to be to justify their strange beliefs.


On the topic of the new information coming out, it seems to be even worse than the first article indicates.

[EatingPie]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Without religion, the question wouldn't have been raised, and the books wouldn't have been banned. So logically, the source of the banning was religion.

No, this is not logical. It ignores everything stated as the reason for the ban.

Religion was the source of the re-evaluation not of the ban. Yes, religion played a role, as a catalyst, but was not considered during the re-evaluation. So it is not logical at all to say it was the source of the ban, as the stated reasons for the ban were age appropriateness etc.

-Pie