Banned Books....What Next?

I

internetfish

New member
Today on MSN I was shocked to discover that the liberal scum are out to ban another round of books. This time Harry Potter titles are the ones to be thrown on the fire. The article went on to describe in detail the books and authors that the school systems across America are trying to ban from not only the school libraries, but also in the general public libraries.

1. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain

2. Of mice and men by John Steinbeck

3. The catcher in the rye by J.D. Salinger

and even a book by Maya Angelou, a known Democrat...

What we have here is heresy plain and simple. This smacks of a certain man who did this in the '30s and 40's in Europe...Hitler. What in the devil is the country going through? We as parents and citizens should stand up to this kind of garbage. Although childless at the moment, I would never let the school system dictate to my child or allow them to try and feed my kid a line of lies to encourage him or her to be one of the "good people" who follow every blind order handed down by mindless school and govt. officials.
The Democrats with their Socialist scum agenda are, in my mind, like the Borg from Star Trek....acquiesce or become assimilated. Heresy! My two cents worth....
 
Here's the top 10 BANNED Books

Here are the books that were most frequently challenged in school and public libraries during the 1990’s, with title, author and some reasons for objections:

1. “Scary Story” series, Alvin Schwartz, violence, occultism, cannibalism.

i loved this series, awesome books.

2. “Daddy’s Roommate,” Michael Willhoite, “promotes a dangerous and ungodly lifestyle.”

Never read it

3. “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,” Maya Angelou, “portrays white people as being horrible, nasty, stupid people.”

A powerful and excellent book

4. “The Chocolate War,” Robert Cormier, “contains profanity, sexual situations, and themes that allegedly encourage disrespectful behavior.”

Never read it

5. “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,” Mark Twain, “offensive and racist language.”

Did any of these people who banned this book, actually read it?!?!

6. “Of Mice and Men,” John Steinbeck, “blasphemous,” “offensive and racist language.”

Another wonderful book, again I'm stunned

7. “Forever,” Judy Blume, a sexual “how-to-do book for junior high students. It glamorizes (sex) and puts ideas in their heads.”

Never read it

8. “Bridge to Terabithia,” Katherine Paterson, “profanity, disrespectful of adults, and an elaborate fantasy world (that) might lead to confusion.”

Never read it

9. “Heather Has Two Mommies,” Leslea Newton, a “skillful presentation to the young child about lesbianism/homosexuality.”

Never read it

10. “The Catcher in the Rye,” J.D. Salinger, profanity, sexual references, “centered around negative activity.”

Not my favorite book, but does not deserve to be banned

In this the information age, I can't believe this still happens. :mad: I can't stand these backwater hick school districts and counties that do this crap. Same idiots that don't teach evolution and think the earth is 10 thousand year old. :mad:



[This message has been edited by bamf (edited September 15, 2000).]
 
They are also banning "Why all politicians rent hookers".

------------------
"Are You Gonna Bark All Day Little Doggie, Or Are You Gonna Bite?"

"Get rid of that nickel plated sissy pistol and get yourself a Glock" - Tommy Lee Jones
 
Oh, there are a LOT more banned books than that; They don't count it as "banning" when the librarian decides not to buy it for ideological reasons; It's only called banned when they librarian wants it and can't get it. Ever try to donate a copy of Unintended Consequences to your local library, and they wouldn't take it? Guess what, it's a banned book!

------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
 
?
Kind of confusing in a way. This reads like a who's who of liberal authors. Can you provide more of the story? Exactly who is it that is pushing for the ban? I tried to find it on msn, but can't.
 
I personally think that ALL books should be banned in public schools.

------------------
Beware the man with the S&W .357 Mag.
Chances are he knows how to use it.
 
Let me offer a contrary view. While I don't want any of these books banned, I neither want my tax dollars going to purchase them for public schol libraries. If liberals really want to push their agenda, they can buy the books for their kids themselves.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Same idiots that don't teach evolution and think the earth is 10 thousand year old. [/quote]

Oh, um, bamf?

I just would like to point out that I don't believe evolution, and do believe that the Earth is 6-10,000 years old. That being said, I am not for banning any sort of book from schools or libraries. It is not my job to stop you or anyone else from reading a book that contains subject matter I dislike- I am responsible merely for what myself and my children read. To paraphrase Voltaire: "I do not agree with what you read, but I will defend unto death your right to read it." Nor am I a "backwoods hick".

Not eveyone on this forum is an atheist/agnostic. There are many others here who believe the same or similar as I do. I understand if you typed this in the heat of emotion, but this statement not only maligns the misdirected people attempting to stifle this literature, it maligns some of us at TFL, as well.

While we may not agree on spritiual/religious (as well as scientific) beliefs, we are allies in the struggle for RKBA. Your statement does not unite us in that cause- it drives a wedge between us.

------------------
Pray as though it's all up to God, act as though it's all up to you.

My EOSM pix

If it isna Scottish, it's CRAP! RKBA!

[This message has been edited by Jedi Oomodo (edited September 17, 2000).]
 
"...I neither want my tax dollars going to purchase them for public schol libraries. If liberals really want to push their agenda, they can buy the books for their kids themselves..."

Rock_jock, I'm inclined to agree. "Banning" books ought to spook everyone, not just a particular political wing, right or left.
 
Rock_Jock has hit the nail on the head.
Purchaces, even donations, to the libraries of public institutions will always be subject to bitter ideological and religious conflict and it is not correct to say that such an institiution's decissions in these matters constitutes censorship. Such a claim, however, a wonderful rhetorical tactic to persue if one is on the losing side of decissions that have been made.
Thoughout all of history and still today for most of the people of theis world, authors great and small, good or bad, are forbidden to wrtie and publich on subjects that would offend the tyrants who rule them. People are forbidden to read them if they do. There are punishments for those dare challenge this state of affairs.
The endless arguments about the content of our libraries and texts that we support with our tax dollars does not constitute censorship no matter who is the fleating victor in such controversies. One can still beg, barrow, but not steal the material in question if one still wants it.
 
I hate to break it to you, folks, but those books are NOT being banned by liberals. They're being banned, mostly, because conservative parents demand it. Only one or two are banned for opposition to liberal ideals--Huck Finn comes to mind.
No, it's the "good guys" who likely agree with you on many other issues who are doing this. Kinda irritating, isn't it?

China, even before the Communists, used to ban any children's book where animals talked like humans, because that was unnatural and wrong.
 
In the wonderful world of used-to-be, the *complexity* of the ideas of certain books was thought to be beyond the comprehension of certain mental-age groups. All in all, this is a rational attitude. So, "Catcher in the Rye", e.g., might readily be seen as inappropriate for elementary school or junior high school kids.

By the time people are out of high school, they are supposedly able to compare ideas and viewpoints and make up their own minds about the appropriateness of political philosophies, life styles, etc.

Controlling access to certain ideas as a function of generalized maturity is understandable to me. Attempting to say that *nobody* should be able decide for themselves what is good and what is bad in the realm of ideas is--to me--totally asinine.

So long as a public (non in-school) library has a balance of ideas purchased via public monies, I'm unconcerned.

The lack of balance on such things as the Second Amendment is disconcerting to me. The very people who would have us believe that we should be able to understand both sides of an argument--regardless of which side we're on--would present only a one-sided and ususally-negative view...

Art
 
Art, you present valid points. Please bear with me :).
1. I read Catcher in the Rye at age 10 and understood all of its "complexities". I did not properly understand Huck Finn until my 20's and I still haven't pegged all of Mr. Clemens' work, much less that of the more important Faulkner.

Simply, I should have the unrestricted ability to own any gun I choose. My personal self defense is not the responsibility of the state. If we were in the sad liberal compromise of the state extracting taxes from the populace to provide my children with defensive tools then I would have a definite opinion on the practical type the money is spent upon. I would prefer bolt actions at first, but for practical reasons, larger cal. semi and selective fire would be included in the curriculum as soon as possible. We would have loud Board meetings with the yuppie Glock crowd sneering a the 1911 neanderthals.

A joke folks :).

I have a fond, sentimental, place in my heart for any library. Let our children free from the bondage of state run indoctrination factories and no controversy will annoy any of us.

I reserve the right to ban any book in my own home because I pay for them.
 
this is sickening.
there are times when i wish i was still in public school so i could protest things like this.
like goosestepping in the superintendants(or who ever banned the books) office and seig heiling him/her then explaining my motives.

then i think of what a good education i get homeschooling and i can read any damn thing i want, so i figure get a good education now, protest things later.

it is horrible to see books being banned at the rate wildfires are starting, it speaks truely of our times and the really really sorry shape our country is in.
 
To add a bit of lightheartedness and sadness to this thread.
My fiancée and me were in Barnes and Noble today. While looking around I noticed a banned book “table”. I glanced over them and didn’t give it much thought but later went back and really looked. Then it hit me, holy crap, I have read every book there except two or three out of about twenty five on the table. Included in this list were The Bible, The Koran, and the kicker The Webster's Dictionary! WTF? The funny/sad part came when I cracked up at my fiancées’ comment that according to this that we would not have to read anything in English Lit. Class. Almost all of them were required reading at some point in my education that ended formally less than two years ago. I still don’t get banning the dictionary.

------------------
DUM SPIRO SPERO
While I Breath I Hope
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top