Locals demand library ban over 400 books. The library doesn't carry a single one

[Phys251]

There is when the majority of the community don't want those books being carried by their library.


They will if the majority of the community decide otherwise, and it is not censorship. Nobody is prohibiting any book from being written on any subject. They are merely limiting which books their library will contain.


If those "bunch of narrow-minded simpletons and morons" are the majority of the community, then that is precisely the interests that public library serves.


No, they are telling the library not to include those 400 books. If they are not in the library already, then there is no problem.


Whether I have been to a library or not is immaterial. If a library is carrying books that their community does not want to read, then they are obviously not serving the best interests of their community as they are required to do.

If you don't like a book, don't read it. Why do righties always force their views onto others?

 

[Decypher]

You are overlooking a few things:

1. Libraries are physical buildings that occupy a certain amount of physical space. They are not nebulous clouds capable of holding an infinite amounts of material. Therefore, there is a physical limit to the number of books a library may contain.
2. Public libraries were created to serve their specific community. They were not created to serve the fancy of some stuck-up, over-educated librarian or any other individual with delusions of dictatorship.

Which means that the books a public library contains should be determined by the community in which it serves. They are not banning books, they are just limiting which books may be included. Which is a requirement for all libraries.

Strange sort of dictator who doesn’t want to ban books. I’m interested to know what you think an “over-educated” librarian might have achieved academically. An English Lit degree, perhaps?

 

[Phys251]

Strange sort of dictator who doesn’t want to ban books. I’m interested to know what you think an “over-educated” librarian might have achieved academically. An English Lit degree, perhaps?

Maybe Glitch thinks Gaston was right in this scene:

 

[JH Oldoc]

They are merely limiting which books their library will contain.

But Glitch, don't you see(?) - if accessibility is limited, only rapists and sexual perverts will have those books, procured illicitly.

and addendum:
Glitch, we live in the computer/internet age. It would shock me to find that most kids do their reading from library books, and not ebooks, or off various websites which they can access w/o prohibition.
I saw a recent TV news report about a teacher who had given a scannable access to a site where all of those banned books were available. ..
...and now that those little inquisitive minds know they aren't supposed to read them, guess what they are going to want to read? Because don't you know it is natural (and healthy) for a young person to be not only curious but defiant?

...anyway - this just seems yet another way for conservatives to rage, and act out on their inability to control everyone all of the time in a Liberal society.

 

[Ivan Denisovich]

If those "bunch of narrow-minded simpletons and morons" are the majority of the community, then that is precisely the interests that public library serves.

Why would a library serve the interests of the majority? Majority opinion has no special value. A library's purpose should be to promote societal development along appropriate lines, and there is little evidence that the public should be included in that.

The great fault of liberalism, which you are advocating here with your excessive democracy, is similar to the great fault of Soviet socialism. Soviet socialism the State censors controlled what could be read, under liberalism you seek to let popular fashion control what should be read. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wisely noted these are two sides of the same coin, both should be avoided.

 

[Phys251]

Why would a library serve the interests of the majority? Majority opinion has no special value. A library's purpose should be to promote societal development along appropriate lines, and there is little evidence that the public should be included in that.

The great fault of liberalism, which you are advocating here with your excessive democracy, is similar to the great fault of Soviet socialism. Soviet socialism the State censors controlled what could be read, under liberalism you seek to let popular fashion control what should be read. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wisely noted these are two sides of the same coin, both should be avoided.

You're talking about pure democracy, which is entirely majority rule. A healthy democracy maintains majority rule, but not at the expense of minorities' rights.

 

[madman]

I can think of no greater endorsement of leftist ideology, then the fact that it promises you that you will be miserable.

 

[Loulit01]

But won't young criminals only find them on the black market. These prohibitions will be no more effective than gun laws, which of course do not stop criminals from acquiring guns.

Just to point out a certain contradiction. Regulation through education always seems the most reasonable solution.

Banning a book is known to increase sales of that book.

 

[choiceone]

Yup

Only allowed the Bible and Little House on the Prarie

These religious fruit loops agenda is all about banning books. They even had a beef with a children's biography on Fredrick Douglas, really

Actually, there have been people who wanted to ban the Bible - too much sin in it.

 

[BabyAugustine]

I say anyone who wants to ban a book must read the book and write a report on its contents and why those contents are dangerous. Let's see them ban 400 books now.

The American Redoubt = Proud to be Racist, Theocratic Book Banners.

Can we not **** with libraries, please?

The reading or non-reading a book will never keep down a single petticoat.

Lord Byron

So your point seems to be that we should ban more books.
If you read you would know that you are being racist. The poor schools that are doing worst and are most political are the ones Blacks are trapped into attending.

Theocratic, so that was your real aim, to bash anybody on here who is religious.

You are a fraud and I see through you , You don't care a whit about book banning thought you would like any race opinion or religious opinion you don't shate to be : BANNED

I see through you with pellucid clarity ( BTW judging by your writing you have very little schooling yourself)

 

[Loulit01]

So your point seems to be that we should ban more books.

Only to someone with no reading comprehension.

If you read you would know that you are being racist. The poor schools that are doing worst and are most political are the ones Blacks are trapped into attending.

And banning books would help them how? Again, no reading comprehension.

Theocratic, so that was your real aim, to bash anybody on here who is religious.

No, I knock religious idiocy all the time. But I'm particularly pissed about banning books due to religious objections.

You are a fraud and I see through you , You don't care a whit about book banning thought you would like any race opinion or religious opinion you don't shate to be : BANNED

I have a degree in English and collect books. I recently downsized and donated over 600 hardcover books of literary merit, in very good condition, to Goodwill because they said they could get them into prisons and libraries and shelters where they were most needed. I still have over six hundred books. I despise book banning because it's book banning.

I see through you with pellucid clarity ( BTW judging by your writing you have very little schooling yourself)

Another example poor reading comprehension.