BlacklightFreakout posted:
You are right, it is their perogative to read whatever. I am just saying, it is my perogative to not care about book bans of books I don't seem important. So yeah, if someone wants to protest...all power to them.
I am just saying, I will get personally get involved and protest with books bans when it comes to intellectual material. Not books on fairy tales.
No, I don't have kids and if I did, "Harry Potter" wouldn't be on their reading material list. Nor my kids will be watching television, except for news. Than again, I am more concerned with creating smart kids that is so brilliant of the mind that they finish high school at age 12 or something than them reading Lords of the Rings. Another book on my crap list.
The thing you have to consider though, is the importance of teaching children how to *enjoy* reading. It's a minority of children that will pick up an expository text and automatically love it. I don't think that reading is something children enjoy naturally for most... they need to be taught to enjoy it by parents who read books to them that are fun and engaging *to the child* rather than what the parents would like their kids to read in the long run.
That's why illiteracy is such a vicious cycle... the parents never enjoyed reading growing up, and therefore they present reading to their children as a chore at best and a punishment at the worst... before they even make it to the school age.
Plus, it has been found in numerous studies that reading alone, regardless of the source material, expands vocabulary and mastery of grammar structures, so YES your children will get linguistic benefit that will carry over to other skill groups... even out of Harry Potter.
As to book banning... the government by nature cannot handle grey areas. It doesn't reason, it can't rationalize. It doesn't know the difference between "quality literature" and Danielle Steele. It is dangerous to allow book banning by the government, period.