A person can decide that they don’t want to read a certain book.
A person can decide that they don’t want their child to read that book.
But a person can’t decide that an entire school or entire town can’t read that book.
ACLU of Indiana
I would like to think this is true, but I am not convinced that it is. Maybe it is in Indiana.
What do you think?
Miss Judy Writes 
I have a friend in Indiana and I don’t think that is generally true there sadly. I find the whole discussion of book banning sad. Like everything in life, books are a product of the time in which they were written. Why not use books that are deemed controversial as a learning tool to spark much-needed discussion? Banning books suppresses that discussion which doesn’t serve anyone in the long run.
LikeLike
How wonderful our world would be if people could have discussions when their ideas or opinions differ.
My father once called a book I was reading as “trash” but he didn’t forbid me from reading it. It was “Black Like Me” and I was in high school.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, I have a very strong belief about people who try to ban books: they should spend half of the time the currently spend in their feelings being offended and actually try reading a book. Half the time, it’s an old, regurgitated reason anyway. You don’t like a book because it doesn’t adhere to your faith, then read faith based books, but my child’s school in another state should not be affected because you think your religion should be offended. Take your head out and put your nose into Fahrenheit 451, then kindly sit down, over there, quietly until you finish. Then we can talk.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bravo, Marla! I wonder if they have read half of the books they are banning.
LikeLike
Honestly, probably not. That’s the problem… people want to ban things on their belief of what’s between the pages and hearsay about how other people perceive it. They rarely take the time to investigate such things independently.
LikeLiked by 1 person