SW Missouri District bans 2 books, including Slaughterhouse5
gimmesometruth27
St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
Just thought I would post this here. This is a school district not far from where i went to college that those around the state refer to as "the buckle of the bible belt". I have noticed that several people on here are named after vonnegut characters so I thought this would be interesting. I just came across it in my local paper and thought i would share.
i do not agree with banning books, especially if the only reason is because they are counter the the teachings of the bible. the district in Republic is a public school district paid for by the taxpayers. the teachings of the bible have no place in a public school, so on that reason alone i have a major issue with banning these books. if you feel that the book is inappropriate for your kids, then don't let them check it out or buy it. don't penalize the rest of those kids by taking it out of the school library or banning it from being part of the curriculum. we should be encouraging kids to read whatever they can get their hands on instead of playing video games or playing around online. i think it is stupid to ban a book these days, if someone wants to read it they can just buy it at a store or buy it online. this banning is just symbolic in my opinion.
SW Missouri district bans 2 books, including 'Slaughterhouse Five'
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/educ ... 0f31a.html
REPUBLIC, Mo. • Two books have been banned from the libraries AND curriculum at Republic High School after a parent complained that their content taught principles contrary to the Bible.
The district's school board voted Monday to remove Kurt Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse-Five" and Sarah Ockler's "Twenty Boy Summer," but to allow Laurie Halse Anderson's "Speak" to be used in the district's high school, The Springfield News-Leader reported.
Superintendent Vern Minor said the board based its decision on the whether the books were age-appropriate.
"We very clearly stayed out of discussion about moral issues," Minor said. "Our discussions from the get-go were age-appropriateness."
Wesley Scroggins of Republic, who had challenged the books and lesson plans last year, said he was mostly pleased with the decision.
"I congratulate them for doing what's right and removing the two books," said Scroggins. "It's unfortunate they chose to keep the other book."
It took a year to reach a decision because the complaint prompted the 4,500-student district to form a task force to develop book standards for all its schools, Minor said. The panel considered existing policies and public rating systems that already exist for music, TV and video games before adopting new standards in April. Those standards were applied to the three books, Minor said.
Several people read the books and provided feedback.
"It was really good for us to have this discussion," Minor said. "Most schools stay away from this and they get on this rampage, the whole book-banning thing, and that's not the issue here. We're looking at it from a curriculum point of view."
Minor said most people supported keeping "Speak," which is taught in English I and II courses, because although it had one short description of a rape, it had a strong message at the end.
But he said those who read "Twenty Boy Summer," available in the library, thought it sensationalized sexual promiscuity and included questionable language, drunkenness, lying to parents and a lack of remorse. And he said "Slaughterhouse Five" contained crude language and adult themes that are more appropriate for college-age students.
Minor said students will be allowed to use those two books for extra class material if they have their parents' permission.
.................................................................
also, what is the point in banning a book if the kids can get credit for them only if they have their parent's permission??
i do not agree with banning books, especially if the only reason is because they are counter the the teachings of the bible. the district in Republic is a public school district paid for by the taxpayers. the teachings of the bible have no place in a public school, so on that reason alone i have a major issue with banning these books. if you feel that the book is inappropriate for your kids, then don't let them check it out or buy it. don't penalize the rest of those kids by taking it out of the school library or banning it from being part of the curriculum. we should be encouraging kids to read whatever they can get their hands on instead of playing video games or playing around online. i think it is stupid to ban a book these days, if someone wants to read it they can just buy it at a store or buy it online. this banning is just symbolic in my opinion.
SW Missouri district bans 2 books, including 'Slaughterhouse Five'
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/educ ... 0f31a.html
REPUBLIC, Mo. • Two books have been banned from the libraries AND curriculum at Republic High School after a parent complained that their content taught principles contrary to the Bible.
The district's school board voted Monday to remove Kurt Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse-Five" and Sarah Ockler's "Twenty Boy Summer," but to allow Laurie Halse Anderson's "Speak" to be used in the district's high school, The Springfield News-Leader reported.
Superintendent Vern Minor said the board based its decision on the whether the books were age-appropriate.
"We very clearly stayed out of discussion about moral issues," Minor said. "Our discussions from the get-go were age-appropriateness."
Wesley Scroggins of Republic, who had challenged the books and lesson plans last year, said he was mostly pleased with the decision.
"I congratulate them for doing what's right and removing the two books," said Scroggins. "It's unfortunate they chose to keep the other book."
It took a year to reach a decision because the complaint prompted the 4,500-student district to form a task force to develop book standards for all its schools, Minor said. The panel considered existing policies and public rating systems that already exist for music, TV and video games before adopting new standards in April. Those standards were applied to the three books, Minor said.
Several people read the books and provided feedback.
"It was really good for us to have this discussion," Minor said. "Most schools stay away from this and they get on this rampage, the whole book-banning thing, and that's not the issue here. We're looking at it from a curriculum point of view."
Minor said most people supported keeping "Speak," which is taught in English I and II courses, because although it had one short description of a rape, it had a strong message at the end.
But he said those who read "Twenty Boy Summer," available in the library, thought it sensationalized sexual promiscuity and included questionable language, drunkenness, lying to parents and a lack of remorse. And he said "Slaughterhouse Five" contained crude language and adult themes that are more appropriate for college-age students.
Minor said students will be allowed to use those two books for extra class material if they have their parents' permission.
.................................................................
also, what is the point in banning a book if the kids can get credit for them only if they have their parent's permission??
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
I've never heard of these books before, so I'm guessing the majority of kids will be unfazed by this banning.
Banning books is idiotic, a school is a place to learn, and sometimes to learn you have to be uncomfortable.
um, I read Slaughterhouse Five when I was in 8th grade. :roll:
Wash me in the blood of Rock & Roll
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
REN: oh its a classic
TOWNPERSON: not in this town
REN: in any town
TOWNSPERSON: tom sawyer is a classic
a little exchange between ren mccormick and the good christian folks of beaumont in footloose.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Well Ron Paul is a bat-shit crazy lunatic who comes across as very sane.
All that political "Free to be you and me so long as you are just like me" bullshit makes the middle and former-middle class white people feel all nice and special but it opens the door for crap like this and then yells "COME AND FORCE YOUR INSANITY ON THE WORLD IN THE NAME OF FREE-DUMB!!!"
Ron Paul, it was pointed out in another thread, doesn't think the government should be involved in marriage. Except his own, of course... which is why he's legally married.
I'm sure Ron Paul will support the rights of these people to slowly chip away at books until the Firemen come to burn them and people are forced to "become" books by memorizing them. (and if you didn't get that reference, shame on you)
Well it doesn't look like the federal government is doing much to stop these books from being banned, so what does the department of education do that isn't already done?
I am sorry for you that you feel that way about Ron Paul. If he is batshit crazy(can't we think of a new term), I can't imagine what you call other politicians. Keep believing in politicians who bend to the political winds...because that has worked out well for everyone. And your point about his marriage is complete garbage, but we don't have to get into that again, as we both know where we stand on the issue.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
That logic seems insane to me.
also, what i find quite funny about dr paul is that last election he was scoffed at and not even allowed to debate. and that was by people in the republican party, so yeah, some republicans think he is crazy as well.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
they find his libertarian ideals contrary to the social conservatism the party establishment wants to add or keep as the laws of the land. Drug enforcement being one of those. The republicans for the most part aren't for any smaller government than democrats.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
This seems less like banning and more like re-working the curriculum. It even mentions the books being available for extra class material with the parents permission.
I'm certainly not for banning books, but I don't think it's bad to look at the appropriateness of books specifically being taught by teachers in the classroom. We want parents involved in their kids school lives, without them involved the kids will fail, but then we want the teachers to make all the decisions? It seems like this was handled fairly well. There are plenty of good books out there.
But maybe I'm reading this wrong.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
the supreme court has already ruled that the books cannot be taken out of libraries
“Local school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books …”
— U.S. Supreme Court in Board of Education, Island Trees School District v. Pico (1982)
that does not protect curriculum however...so if they remove it from school libraries, expect this to not hold up to any legal challenge.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Both districts are censoring as they see fit (the Pledge is a better example on the left) and the majority of constituents are OK with what is happening in their district ... although they are super angry on what is happening 1,000 miles away. And depending on what our personal views are, we are happy with what one district is doing and mad at what another is doing, even though it doesn't affect us.
Why can't we just accept that their are many different cultures throughout this nation? I'm not super religious, yet I live in the Bible belt. I accept that religion is going to have an impact on just about everything because that is where I choose to live. I also used to live in San Francisco and accepted that the GLTB was going to have an impact on just about everything because that is where I choose to live.
I don't think people in Indiana should be forced to indoctrinate by rules set forth in San Francisco, and I don't think San Francisco should be influenced by beliefs in Indiana. It would not be logical.
I don't understand why people on the far right and far left have issues understanding this.
I think Ron should answer that since he thinks the DOE is indoctrinating kids.
That wasn't an answer to my question. He said what he thinks the education system is doing, but my question to you was what does the department of Education do that isn't already done? I will even add to that, what does it do that isn't or cannot be done by the states?
.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Here's a link to the DOE page:
http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/focus/what_pg2.html#howdoes
The first thought that comes to my mind is that funding can, in a sense, balance things out for the poorer states.
Where did I say that?
He's nuts for many reasons.
The marriage thing just makes him a bit of a hypocrite.
You want the federal government to go to each individual school board and tell them what books to put in the library?
I thought you were for states rights.
Wait... How is adding a section on gay history to social studies class "censoring?"
I am. It was in a response to you and Go Beavers talking in a sarcastic manner about states and local governments being in charge of education like it is a bad thing. the response was more to Go Beavers than to you, you of course just called Ron Paul "batshit crazy".
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
When you add, you must remove something, no?
To me I see it as a school district determining their curriculum. Now, removing the books from the library is wrong to me, but removing it from the curriculum being taught? That is always going to be debatable as that is just everyone's opinion. And the school is responsible for teaching the kids, but also doing so FOR the communities they serve. It's a fine line between serving your community and "censoring" some topics though.
Do you know what "censoring" means?
Nobody is saying they should be forced to include Slaughterhouse 5 in lessons. I read that when I was 13 but I doubt most of my school mates would have made it through that. Nor would I want it taught. But removing it because it's not Christian enough is wrong and un-American.
As far as education loans to students...that might be the biggest boondoggle of them all. it seems to me, and I could be wrong certainly, that continually raising the out put of stafford loans so that students can "afford" the rising costs of tuition by going further and further into debt simply allows for the rising costs of tuition. Meaning colleges know that the federal government will continue to raise the amount that they give out to students based on the costs of tuition at a university so they know that they can keep raising them up while offering nothing new to the students except more crowded class rooms so that the university can pay for research projects for the professors who aren't really there to teach anyway ... I wonder if state schools would be charging 18000-20000 a year in tuition for 35000 students if the feds weren't subsidizing most of it. Maybe the cost of a college education would be fucking reasonable. who knows, none of us ever will because attacking the department of education and the programs there in makes one ...how was it said...bat-shit crazy...
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Like, what is the purpose of atheist groups renting billboards and slapping ads on buses to let everyone know God doesn't exist? What the heck is the point? I get that people don't believe in God, but why wave a flag in everyone's face proclaiming it? It's not like someone who has been going to church all their life is going to have a major revelation just because of a billboard. It just pisses people off. Someone speaks up that they shouldn't have the billboards because it offends them and they are labeled an extremist by the guys paying for the ad.
It's not extremism. It's business as usual.