Someone needs to explain this to me. What is dangerous about a book? An idea? Are all books dangerous to read or just some? And who gets to decide and why?
Just some. Perhaps most. (And who decides which are dangerous?)
"And who gets to decide and why?"
That's a good question. (It’s the only question!) Individuals, families, libraries, schools, churches, and communities should attempt to answer it. (No one can or should answer it. In a free society we decide for ourselves which books we wish to read)
"Why would you ban a book and not a gun?"
Books are more dangerous than guns. The latter may harm the body, the former may harm the soul. (What’s dangerous are people who think they know what’s best for others.)
In my family, I do. At the Orland Library, I suppose there is a committee. At the High School, I suppose it is ultimately the school board. Why the hang up about this?
If people who think they know what's best for others are dangerous, then everyone is dangerous. Some people think it is best for my children to be exposed to bad books. I would agree that these people are dangerous.
”In my family, I do. At the Orland Library, I suppose there is a committee. At the High School, I suppose it is ultimately the school board… (And you trust these people to decide FOR YOU what you should be able to read?)
If people who think they know what's best for others are dangerous, then everyone is dangerous. (No. Only those who think they know what’s best for others are dangerous. For instance; I would never presume to know what’s best for you. Please; read whatever you wish to!) Some people (Who are these people?) think it is best for my children to be exposed to bad books. I would agree that these people are dangerous.”
But…we could go on forever here. Please tell me about some of those ‘bad books’? Examples?
And you asked about my hang up. It’s quite simple: freedom. If someone tells me what I can’t read, then it’s an easy progression to telling me what I can’t believe and what I can’t say.
There are various degrees and kinds of censorship. Many things should be censored. Porn and hate literature are some obvious examples. In our society, where there no longer exists a religious or cultural consensus, "who does the censoring?" is a bigger question than it should be. Censorship is therefore best left to small units (libraries, schools, municipalities, etc.).
I love books and own more than 5000 volumes. Even a few of my books are bad and should not be widely disseminated. I keep them around for reference, but the world would be better off without them.
"No. Only those who think they know what’s best for others are dangerous. For instance; I would never presume to know what’s best for you."
But you do presume to know what is best for me. You think it is best for me to live in a society without censorship. I disagree. Why should your views prevail over mine?
"You think it is best for me to live in a society without censorship." Truth be told, I didn't say that. (And it's obvious that you do a bang up job of self censorship already.) What I did say, many times, was that censorship is dangerous because freedom is threatened by it. If you're OK with that, Go ahead. Censor yourself and those close to you. Just don't try telling me what I can or cannot read. I'm a far better judge of what is suitable for me than you are.
Nice to find another Orland blogger! To answer your questions ...
ReplyDelete"What is dangerous about a book? An idea?"
A bad idea, certainly.
"Are all books dangerous to read or just some?"
Just some. Perhaps most.
"And who gets to decide and why?"
That's a good question. Individuals, families, libraries, schools, churches, and communities should attempt to answer it.
"Why would you ban a book and not a gun?"
Books are more dangerous than guns. The latter may harm the body, the former may harm the soul.
"What is dangerous about a book? An idea?"
ReplyDeleteA bad idea, certainly. (And who decides ‘bad’?)
"Are all books dangerous to read or just some?"
Just some. Perhaps most. (And who decides which are dangerous?)
"And who gets to decide and why?"
That's a good question. (It’s the only question!) Individuals, families, libraries, schools, churches, and communities should attempt to answer it. (No one can or should answer it. In a free society we decide for ourselves which books we wish to read)
"Why would you ban a book and not a gun?"
Books are more dangerous than guns. The latter may harm the body, the former may harm the soul. (What’s dangerous are people who think they know what’s best for others.)
"And who decides ‘bad’?"
ReplyDeleteIn my family, I do. At the Orland Library, I suppose there is a committee. At the High School, I suppose it is ultimately the school board. Why the hang up about this?
If people who think they know what's best for others are dangerous, then everyone is dangerous. Some people think it is best for my children to be exposed to bad books. I would agree that these people are dangerous.
”In my family, I do. At the Orland Library, I suppose there is a committee. At the High School, I suppose it is ultimately the school board… (And you trust these people to decide FOR YOU what you should be able to read?)
ReplyDeleteIf people who think they know what's best for others are dangerous, then everyone is dangerous. (No. Only those who think they know what’s best for others are dangerous. For instance; I would never presume to know what’s best for you. Please; read whatever you wish to!) Some people (Who are these people?) think it is best for my children to be exposed to bad books. I would agree that these people are dangerous.”
But…we could go on forever here. Please tell me about some of those ‘bad books’? Examples?
And you asked about my hang up. It’s quite simple: freedom. If someone tells me what I can’t read, then it’s an easy progression to telling me what I can’t believe and what I can’t say.
There are various degrees and kinds of censorship. Many things should be censored. Porn and hate literature are some obvious examples. In our society, where there no longer exists a religious or cultural consensus, "who does the censoring?" is a bigger question than it should be. Censorship is therefore best left to small units (libraries, schools, municipalities, etc.).
ReplyDeleteI love books and own more than 5000 volumes. Even a few of my books are bad and should not be widely disseminated. I keep them around for reference, but the world would be better off without them.
"No. Only those who think they know what’s best for others are dangerous. For instance; I would never presume to know what’s best for you."
ReplyDeleteBut you do presume to know what is best for me. You think it is best for me to live in a society without censorship. I disagree. Why should your views prevail over mine?
"You think it is best for me to live in a society without censorship." Truth be told, I didn't say that. (And it's obvious that you do a bang up job of self censorship already.) What I did say, many times, was that censorship is dangerous because freedom is threatened by it. If you're OK with that, Go ahead. Censor yourself and those close to you. Just don't try telling me what I can or cannot read. I'm a far better judge of what is suitable for me than you are.
ReplyDelete