Iconator_870a894c3025a65d8ba47052171babda_thumb

What the @/%$>? That is so wrong! No one should be banned from reading! That goes against everything I stand for! silently fumes

Posted by Olivia [Phoenix] WBM! on February 15, 2009, 11:43 AM
Me_thumb

Olivia,

I’m not sure what’s more shocking to me. That this happened at all, or that there is not more media coverage. Glad to hear I’m not the only one fuming.

Posted by Doris on February 15, 2009, 11:59 AM
Maraudersmap_thumb

I just about fell off my broom when I read this! Government is trying to regulate everything and it’s wrong. Banning kids under 12 from the library? It’s hard enough to get kids to sit down and read a book instead of picking up a game controller or TV remote. This would give them yet 1 more excuse not to read. Our education system is severly broken. We have kids everyday dropping out of high school or graduating high school who still can’t read. I think the ALA needs to get their priorities in order and encourage kids to come to the library and read. Accio Doctor Seuss!!

Posted by rhadamenthes {ROAR} on February 15, 2009, 12:10 PM
Me_thumb

rhadamenthes,

The ALA is trying to get this fixed. (I’ve linked to their complete letter in my post) The Consumer Product Safety Commission, is the government organization trying to keep children under 12 from use of books in a public library.

The ALA is very pro-active in the academic freedom movement. I tell people that if you value your freedom of speech, kiss a librarian.

I’m glad to see so many people so passionate about this. I’ve already received copies of owls sent to a few congressional leaders.

Posted by Doris on February 15, 2009, 12:32 PM
Avatar_thumb

I’ve been reading since I was 3, I have never eaten a book in my life, much less got lead poisoning from one. This is just another way that the government is trying to raise a kid instead of letting the parents. I know it takes a village to raise a child, but when the village sets up all the rules then the parents hands are tied. This is just wrong.

Posted by MGD5981 on February 15, 2009, 01:10 PM
Me_thumb

MGD5981 – I completely agree with you.

I’ve added a link to the actual ruling for you guys to download and read yourself if you’d like.

Posted by Doris on February 15, 2009, 01:12 PM
Dsc02812__2__thumb

Doris, Thank you for bringing this to our attention. I had not heard a thing about this! It certainly does smack of Umbridge. It is so frustrating & amazing to me that a country as “advanced” as ours seems so often to instigate laws that are REactive rather than PROactive. Can our government officials not sit back & see how absolutely ludicrous this position is? The sad thing is, they obviously don’t. I will be relaying this info on to others so that we can rally behind the cause.

Posted by Lillylove on February 15, 2009, 02:08 PM
Children_thumb

This is absurd! The libraries in America have been suffering from lack of use but over the past few years (thanks in large part to Jo Rowling) reading has increased, especially with the young readers. To ban them from libraries is to curse this country. Awareness is key! This needs to be blown up so everyone can know about it asap!

Posted by Sirius' Lover <3<3 [ROAR] on February 15, 2009, 02:23 PM
Me_thumb

Thanks guys – Call your congressmen, and if you CC me I might add some of your emails in here (removing your name of course) but I’m serious that we need to not let this happen. We can assure our children’s safety without banning them from libraries.

Posted by Doris on February 15, 2009, 02:41 PM
Fightevilreadbookswizrocklopediacom_thumb

I cannot believe this! To ban children under the age of twelve from libraries is completely absurd! While there are certainly many children that don’t behave very well in libraries, they’re far more likely to just yell and disturb the peace than they are to start chomping on a copy of Sorcerer’s Stone.

While libraries are a source of books for many people, what about bookstores? Are there soon going to be bouncers that card kids when all they want to do is buy a book? There are enough children that will probably never read a book for pleasure as long as they live without the help of this ruling.

Down with Umbridge!

Posted by ravenpuffq on February 15, 2009, 03:05 PM
Me_thumb

ravenpuffq you bring up a good point, kids who can’t afford books will be hurt the most.

Posted by Doris on February 15, 2009, 03:09 PM
Wand_thumb

The plain truth is, we are losing the war on stupid!

Abraham Lincoln once said that as a nation of free men we must live for all time, or die by suicide. Obviously we have chosen the latter.

Posted by wordsaremagic on February 15, 2009, 05:52 PM
Me_thumb

“We are losing the war on stupid”

I want that on a t-shirt!

We have chosen the latter, but choosing to allow things like this to slip by us. We have to do something about it.

Thanks -

Posted by Doris on February 15, 2009, 06:01 PM
Wand_thumb

t-shirts? Cool idea! hats, pins, banners, road side billboards…

I liked this line in your post: “Since books are not considered toys they are not regulated and the books could be contaminated.”

Books really are contaminated—they are full of dangerous ideas (and I am not really joking about that—many really are full of dangerous ideas). And, when we read deeply and critically, we are in a very real sense EATING those books.

But is the cure for bad thinking a curriculum of not thinking? That strikes me as being similar to the old idea that we should lower a sick person’s temperature by bleeding him. It actually works. Take enough blood and the body’s temperature will lower to room temperature (product warning label: “should death occur, discontinue use; if symptoms persist, consult a physician”).

You also wrote: “Can’t we just trust the smallest children’s parents to watch over them?” In our current Nanny State, apparently we cannot trust the parents to watch over themselves, much less their children. I once bought a camping lantern, one of the kind that has a fabric “mantle” you attach to the gas output. It had a label, “Do Not Eat.” I have seen similar labels on things like batteries. Steak knives need to have a label—warning, sharp; serious injury may occur if you eat this product.

I say, let’s require a label on on televisions: warning, use of this device may distort your perception of reality.

And compared to lanterns, batteries, knives, and televisions, books are FAR more dangerous. Hitler knew that. Every book burner in history has know that. "“. . . As every totalitarian regime knows, the ability to think is a contagious disease.”——-Stanislaw Baranczak

Posted by wordsaremagic on February 15, 2009, 11:06 PM
Me_thumb

wordsaremagic – You totally rock!

I tell kids all the time, they need to devour their books. Warning kiddos, I did not mean literally.

This seems to me like a bad Saturday Night Live sketch, but it’s really happening.

New label for books:
Warning: Reading this will increase your enjoyment for life, help you learn to think critically, may help you earn more money but if you eat it, well you might get a tummy ache. On second thought, we’ll just keep this away from you – you don’t know what’s best for you and we have to protect you from yourself.

I’m turning into a cynic!

Posted by Doris on February 15, 2009, 11:14 PM
You must be logged in to MyLeaky to comment. Please click here to log in.
Ready to see Leaky in Color?