Do ebooks burn at 451 degrees Fahrenheit, too?

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by rcentros

It's funny that movie theaters have figured out how to keep underage children out movies that aren't age appropriate (except when accompanied by a legal guardian). Shouldn't libraries be able to do the same? Couldn't a children's library card be age restricted (like movies) unless the parent decides to override that age restriction?

Putting aside that school libraries are already curated to be age appropriate as tubemonkey pointed out and was mentioned at least once earlier in this thread, sure. But by the same token they can be made so parents opt in to the restrictions.

Of course we won’t mention any of the issues around movie ratings, like that content given an R rating in the 80s would today be given a Pg13 rating. Or that movies are designed to skirt as close to the next highest rating while not crossing the threshold for it to try and maximize the viewership.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by rcentros

It's funny that movie theaters have figured out how to keep underage children out movies that aren't age appropriate (except when accompanied by a legal guardian). Shouldn't libraries be able to do the same? Couldn't a children's library card be age restricted (like movies) unless the parent decides to override that age restriction?

Seems like a simple solution to me.

One item is the books in a school library are already "age appropriate" to their student body. Very few if any school librarians would purchase age inappropriate books since that's a rapid way to collecting employment insurance.

For the most part what people seem to be complaining about is not age the book is aimed at but content. For instance, "My Two Dads" was the cause of a tempest in a teapot back in the mid-teens. A story told from the point of view of the adopted child of a gay couple. Most of the people complaining about the book seemed to be horrified by the possibility that not their children (after all, they were good parents!) but other children would be forced into homosexuality by reading the book. Then there were the ones who espoused the belief that the only reason a gay couple would adopt a child was to groom them, suggesting that their opinion was that all homosexuals are, at best, pederasts). Some of the comments made at that time seemed to indicate that quite a few of those people were upset that being homosexual was no longer deserving of the death penalty in North America.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by DNSB

For the most part what people seem to be complaining about is not age the book is aimed at but content. For instance, "My Two Dads" was the cause of a tempest in a teapot back in the mid-teens.

I believe people are still challenging And Tango Makes Three, a picture book of a true story about penguins.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by meeera

I believe people are still challenging And Tango Makes Three, a picture book of a true story about penguins.

I think it's still in the top 10 banned books list.

The funniest memory I have is of the mother of a 17 month child who wanted the book banned since the cover image of two adult penguins and a baby penguin did not make it clear that the adult penguins were a same sex couple. I was wondering how you were supposed to make it clear?

All rights in the attached image remain with the owners.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Take it up with the principal and school board.

I don't like wasting my time. Besides I "fixed" the problem by not allowing my kids go to public school.

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

School libraries are already age appropriate.

Apparently not always.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by DNSB

The quote above sound familiar? I was wondering how far you carried that opinion considering the number of times over the last decades that children have died due to parental decisions on their health care. Not to mention that number of people who are willing to rear up on their hind legs and support the belief that a child is the parent's property to do with what they will. Given that background as to the nightmares that parental control can cause, I have trouble accepting claims that parents know what's best for their children.

How many times have kids died in the past decades due to bad decisions by careless doctors? I'm guessing many more than have died from poor decisions from parents (who actually pay attention to what's going on with their kids). But what does any of this have to do with a parent's decisions about what moral subjects should be promoted in school? Nada. Zero. And Zilch. Why don't you deal with what I write instead of making up straw men to attack?

Originally Posted by DNSB

BTW, one of my friends was a child bride from the Bountiful community. She was "married" at 12 with the enthusiastic consent of her parents and their religious leaders. Is this okay by your standards since, by most people standards, she was a young child at the time of her "marriage" and her parents sincerely believed they were acting in her best interests?

I'm sorry to hear that — allowing books by religious zealots promoting child marriages would be one of those I would NOT want in the school library. How about you? Maybe the concept of censorship is not always that bad after all, eh?

Originally Posted by DNSB

After all, "Der Weg zur Höllen sey mit lauter gutem Vorsatz gepflastert."

Yep. And so-called "good intentions" can destroy a child's innocence. That's why I oppose the crap some teachers want to push on our young kids.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Whereas yours is to bar all children based on the desire of some parents. ...

I gave my solution. Bar kids from objectionable material unless given permission to read it by their parents.

Next problem.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by rcentros

I gave my solution. Bar kids from objectionable material unless given permission to read it by their parents.

Your 'solution' requires a universally-accepted definition of "objectionable". There isn't one.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by meeera

Your 'solution' requires a universally-accepted definition of "objectionable". There isn't one.

Here's a story from a Colorado school board meeting where the material available to the children of a school district was deemed too objectionable to be read by a parent — though it was available to students. I would say that it probably qualifies as objectionable.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...lable-students

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Apparently not always.

The books being challenged (at least those I am aware of) are age appropriate for the libraries they are in. Here's the ALA website of the 10 most challenged books per year back to the year 2000. Of the 30 most challenged books in the last three years, half are challenged because they address LGBT issues..

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Here's a story from a Colorado school board meeting where the material available to the children of a school district was deemed too objectionable to be read by a parent — though it was available to students. I would say that it probably qualifies as objectionable.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...lable-students

So a book that the school district has one copy of in a high school and another book that the school has no copies of qualifies as being made accessible to students by the school. Perhaps the students could manage to access the books online while using the school district's network. If so, that likely violated the school district's term of use which, in my local school districts, the parents and students get to agree to at the start of each school year.

I'm reminded of a parent in this area whom ended up with egg on their face after complaining about their child being exposed to pornography in school and demanding the book another student had read the racy passages from be removed from the school. As the parent of the child in question pointed out, most of the passages were from the Song of Solomon from a copy of the bible which the church member's child had brought to school with them. I seem to remember that it was the lines about "my sister, my spouse", "my sister, my love, my dove, my undefiled" and "thy two breasts are like..." that were found objectionable. The other objectionable passages were involved Lot and his daughters. Lot, you remember him? The gentleman who offered his daughters to the mob to leave him alone and later in the story got both daughters pregnant. But then Lot was a just and/or righteous man according to Peter so that's all okay.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

The books being challenged (at least those I am aware of) are age appropriate for the libraries they are in. Here's the ALA website of the 10 most challenged books per year back to the year 2000. Of the 30 most challenged books in the last three years, half are challenged because they address LGBT issues..

But if we can keep out heads in the sand long enough, they'll go back into the closet...

[meeera]

Why shouldn't high school students read about masturbation?

[meeera]

Originally Posted by rcentros

And my view is not going to change, so I'll let whoever wants have the last word here. But I note censorship is alive and well on the social media sites ... and no one seems to be complaining about that.

In much the same way that privately-owned book collections are free to censor their own content.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by meeera

Why shouldn't high school students read about masturbation?

Because these books usually pass it off as normal and acceptable behavior, whereas those in the Catholic Church (for one) teach that it is a mortal sin (self abuse). Which brings us back to why schools should not be teaching kids "moral values" in contradiction to the parents' religious beliefs. Nor should so-called "neutral" schools be providing such books in their school libraries. It's not neutral.