"Parent's responsibility, not the school's, to teach"You almost got that right...It is the responsibility of the
schools to teach. And it is the responsibility of the parent to see that the
kid attends, pays attention, studies, does homework, and instills in the kid, to
get ahead you must get an education.
Do Utahns even know what "civil liberties" means? The way ACLU bashing
occurs here, I think many people here don't deserve any.
The day will come when you will be forced send you children to private schools
because of the politically approved garbage taught in public schools.
Banning books is a big red flag. What are you afraid of? Books?
Is this letter a joke?This person actually supports book banning?
Who decides that? Should we have a big bonfire in the streets and toss these
unwanted books into them? Where have I seen this before?Let the free
market decide on books. If they aren't wanted or popular, publishers
won't make them! If students are taught and believe in their
moral/religious teachings, they won't touch those books. Even if they do,
they have the Atonement to use in order to repent for their sins and book
readings. We need to stop this nanny government of expelling books
and getting rid of Sex Edu. You cannot be saved in innocence. Let us
prepare our children for the real world and let them make real choices. After
all, wasn't that the plan all along?
Has the writer actually read the book? I think I'll have to go find it in
the library and read it myself. Then I'll be able to decide based on
knowledge rather than fear induced by others.
Hey posters....Before you bash the letter writer for being
everything Book banner to whatever..You may want to read the comments of the
author of the book..She has stated that the book WAS NOT intended
for elementary school, but for the teenagers who could grasp the concepts...
@The Real Maverick:"This person actually supports book
banning?"I see your point. Where are 'Playboy' and
'Hustler?' I realize they are not actually books... but banning these
beneficial and educational publications borders on malfeasance. Our poor
kids... how are they to ever make it in this world being so deprived?"If students are taught and believe in their moral/religious teachings,
they won't touch those books."Too funny! What bubble do
you live in?"Even if they do, they have the Atonement to use in
order to repent for their sins and book readings."I know...
Don't you just love it? I plan on doing just that as I lay dying. In the
mean time, I plan to eat, drink, and be marry..."We need to stop
this nanny government of expelling books and getting rid of Sex Edu. You cannot
be saved in innocence."You cannot be saved buried in abject
When the your 'best' argument you can make of some type if harm is to
erroniously compair a book about a loving family that happens to have to moms
instead of a mom and a dad to incest you lose all credability sorry.
Re: "Gay marriage . . . has no place in schools, in the library or
textbooks, etc."Too true. And the fact that even the author of
the book in questions understood that should be reason enough to fire the
librarian that ordered it.UEA/NEA hates it when we point it out, but
there's no question of censorship if the book was never purchased in the
first place. Even the ACLU can't make a school library buy a book.
The book was not promoting Gay marriage, but rather teaches tolerence and
acceptance by highlighting bigotry and hatred.I think school aged
children SHOULD be taught those things.And you wonder why bullying
is still such an issue?BTW - Book banning was rule #1 in radical
right-wing Facsist and Taliban regimes. And who's the
one's pretending to promote Constitutional Freedoms, while FORCING everyone
to Choose The Right -- always?Book banning.Biggest Red-Flag in
trampling our Constitutional, Civil, and Religous ideas regarding freedom.
This letter is mind boggling. It compares gay marriage to incest? This book is
about being in a loving family where both partners are of the same gender. It is
no more about sex than one about a family with heterosexual parents,
step-parents or a single parent. All children, even in Utah, know classmates
from non-tradtional families. It is teaching them tolerance and not to
ostracize, discriminate, ridicule and harrass those who are different.
I have not read or seen this book so I can not judge it's content. I will
say this however, as someone who is looking to go into teaching I feel it is
important for children to understand that their classmates come from all
different kinds of homes and backgrounds. My oldest brother lives in
rural North Carolina and his kids are the only Mormons at their school. Imagine
if all their classmates shunned them simply because of their religion. If you personally oppose the gay lifestyle because of religious reasons,
that's your choice. But the fact of the matter is, your kids are going to
hear about it one way or the other. Perhaps seeing this book might actually be
beneficial for both your kids and you.That's just my opinion.
@embarrassed Utahn!You said - "Do Utahns even know what
"civil liberties" means? The way ACLU bashing occurs here, I think many
people here don't deserve any."You're implication is,
the ACLU is above criticism and that people have no right to disagree with them.
You also seem to imply that civil liberties is something that only people who
agree with your politics, lifestyle or beliefs deserve to have. Perhaps then you agree that a man named Michael Salman deserved to be
sentenced to 60 days in jail and given three years probation for committing the
unspeakable crime of holding Bible studies in his house. Apparently he permits
from the city to do this, yet the city has never demanded permits for similar
neighborhood gatherings such as for poker nights or Monday Night Football
parties. A couple in San Juan Capistrano, California has been
threatened with jail by city officials also for holding Bible classes in their
home. Yet when a large Super Bowl party was held nearby, the city didn't
complain about that.I would be curious to know how the ACLU feels
about cases like this? Perhaps embarrassedUtahn has already answered that
question for me.
This really is ridiculous --- If it's about promoting the
"Leave it to Beaver", "Father Knows Best" black & white
"Pleasantville" fictional utopia created in 1950's T.V.Then we should look at this wholeistically and leave no stone left
unturned....Why not ban books with DIVORCED parents?or Widowed
parents, orMinority or Mixed Race Parentsor Parent
worshipping at different Churches, or No churches at all?And while
we're at it - ban books mentioning Abusive parents, or Depressed or Mentally ill parents.Cherry picking one against all
the others is undeniable BIGOTRY.My heck!This place drives me
insane somedays!BTW - When you start burning books, burning people
is not too far behind.
Re: ". . . I feel it is important for children to understand that their
classmates come from all different kinds of homes and backgrounds."And that's your right. But parents who feel differently about the issue
have the same rights as you.The problem here is that liberals
believe only they are smart enough, or open-minded enough, or cosmopolitan
enough, or righteous enough to dictate what EVERYONE's kids should learn is
school, and therefore, they are the only ones that should have the right to do
so.Then they turn around and call everyone else bigoted.Too funny!
"Gay marriage... [or Racesof gendersor Religionor Culturesor physical abilitiesor times or placesor
social classesor different...different...different...] is a
subject to be handled by parents or guardians, period. It has no place in
schools, in the library or textbooks, etc. That is called indoctrination."
========= Fill in the blank and can anyone else see how
biased, one-sided, myopic, narrow-minded and bigoted this statement truely is?
The teacher/librarian (whoever)decided to put the book "behind the desk"
made a tactical error.He/she should have either NOT bought the bk.,
or put it on open shelves. In other words: don't buy a bk (out of public
funds), then attempt to hide it.The school district probably already
has a policy in place with regards to purchasing materials. I suspect that
policy doesn't allow purchased materials to be "hidden".That is probably why the ACLU has a case. THAT POLICY was probably violated.
The letter writer would have a valid point IF the schools were requiring her
child to read this book. Instead, this lawsuit only seeks to end censorship and
make the book available to those who want it.
If we are supposed to get rid of books that discuss polygamy we better remove
every book concerning the history of Utah. Every single one of those books talks
@ClarkHippo -- If the facts of those cases are as you present them, then the
ACLU would likely sue the cities in question on behalf of those individuals.
The ACLU is only "liberal" in the sense that they believe in protecting
the civil liberties of all people, even if those people are not popular.
Because unpopular people are often deemed to be "liberal" by
conservatives, it is a common misconception of conservatives that the ACLU is
"liberal". Since they at one point filed suit to help out Rush Limbaugh
(in connection with his drug abuse issues), I don't think anyone can
accurately say they only help "liberals".
@LDS liberalBook banning is much a part of the far left,
or do you just want to pretend to ignore all the banning of books and ideas and
speech by communists and others of the far left, even her in US by leftest
college students and professors, l9berasl teachers at lower levels.or how the far left controls tv, radio and the internet and the press,
expecially in communist countries.or ignore that is was NAZIs, a far
left party, a sibling of communism, that burned books (NAZI = national socialist
party of the german workers, a socialist party for the worker is by definition
the left)OR you ignore the liberals attempts to shut down and
minimize talk radio, and shutdown any voice or anyone who supports or endorses
ideas that not are in line with leftest dogma. Just see climate change,
evolution, any racial thing, or opposition to homosexuality or gay marriage,
views on energy and wilderness, or ...Yes. the far left bans and
@ confused: Where - exactly - does the author state the book is for junior high
students? Because the book is written on a grade school (1-4 grade) reading
level and nothing on the author's website indicates she wrote a
children's book for junior high students.@ 1conservative: The
book was bought through the regular book purchase channels. It was on the shelf
in the library at the school. A child mentioned the book the book the his/her
parents or borrowed the book and took it home or something. Once the parents
became aware of the book, there was a petition to remove the book from the
school. The school compromised by placing the book behind the desk so that only
children with a note from their parents could check it out.The ACLU
is arguing that the book should be available to all students, not just those who
are already aware enough of it to ask their parents for a note so they can read
@ ClarkHippo: Michael Salman built a building in his backyard in which to hold
church services with up to 80 church members twice a week at which he collected
tithes - not Bible studies. The building did not meet fire and safety codes.
Salman claimed the building as a church so that he would not have to pay
property taxes on it, but when questioned on safety requirements, he claimed the
building was for personal use and not subject to the same safety standards
imposed on other churches.He cannot have it both ways - a church
exempt from property taxes and a private building exempt from building codes.
In no way were his civil liberties violated.The couple in San Juan
Capistrano were in violation of a city code that prohibits "religious,
fraternal or non-profit" gatherings of more than 3 people without a permit.
In response to their citation and fines, the city is changing the code to be
more in line with state building codes that require no permit for home religious
study groups of 50 people or less. The fine money was refunded to the couple.
This case was also about building codes.
@LDS Liberal:"BTW - Book banning was rule #1 in radical right-wing
Facsist and Taliban regimes."Yeah, but they burned all the
books... except their beloved Koran.Banning books and burning them
are too different issues. In our society you can always get a copy of any
banned book from someplace. Some places ban marijuana... but people can always
find and get it.
I'm surprised people still think kids seek out and check out books from the
Banning books just scares me.Has there ever been a "good"
society which banned books? Banning books usually is the start of a
really bad and scary society... Does Utah really want to play with
fire? Lets not go down that road. Let the books be and
let children and parents decide what to read.
Much of Utah is so far away from the real world, it's amazing.
The fact of the matter is there is no book banning going on.The
fact of the matter is we have always censured and controlled material for
children.It is our duty and responsibility to do so.There is NO book banning going on. Any one can get that particular book if
they want it.But is is our duty as a society and a community to
manage what our children can see and read. And sometimes a child
needs a parents permission and approval.Parents have every right to
decide how certain things are presented to their children.
@Noodlekaboodle:"If we are supposed to get rid of books that discuss
polygamy we better remove every book concerning the history of Utah."And especially the Holy Bible."Every single one of those
books talks about polygamy."Wait'll our gay friends get
homosexual marriage pushed through. You'll see polygamy resurface with a
vengeance. It'd only be fair. If two same sex people can marry as a human
right, why can't those with a propensity for polygamy also marry as a
matter of human right? Or a number of many other combinations?
I think the objection parents have is they don't want their children
exposed to the Homosexual agenda in gradeschool. It shouldn't be part of a
childs concerns. I understand the need for homosexuals to cast themselves as
perpetual victims, and claim that the children they obtained and brought into
their unusual family settings might be misunderstood or bullied, but it might be
more appropriate to approach the topic of bullying rather than introducing
children to human sexuality at such a young age. This concept of sexualizing
children for the good of the gays is repugnant to parents who think children
should at least get a few years of innocence. Despite having some of
the highest levels of disposable income of any other victim class in society,
gays continue to believe that without special consideration they won't keep
the spotlight. But many parents who actually contributed to their
children's genetic makeup feel that the gay identity needs to take a
backseat to raising children. And young children simply don't
understand sex. That's a problem and a conflict that's unlikely to go
away... regardless of one's perceived hurt feelings or sense of outrage.