Philip Pullman -- the golden compass. they say it is anti-god and won't have it in the schools. they also say it is a children's book but from what I see it is definetly all adult. Don has the series so I am going to read at least the first one. I hate it when a group tells others they are not allowed to read something. Look at Harry Potter, Can't people judge what is fiction and entertaining and what is reality. I am quite certain no child would walk beside a polar bear in real life like the cover shows. children have more sense than that, so now I have to read it just to see why someone doesn't like it.
It's funny how some of those who are most vocal about freedom and democracy are the first in line to ban reading materials from school, simply because the readings don't embrace the exact same beliefs. Well, not so much funny as pathetic and deplorable.
Is there a link to an article about this? I'm not sure, but legally can they "ban" a book? Unless they're a private school, I don't think they can. I find it interesting how some people are picking out The Golden Compass as "anti-God." Sadly, a vast majority of modern-day writing can be classified as anti-God, but no one says anything about them. While the book may in fact be anti-God, beside the obvious flaws in banning it, they're only going to draw more attention to it.
sorry no link. It was on Bourque on the internet yesterday. but it is gone today. I had never heard of the books until the news story. But Don had the 3 so I am now reading them.
It took me a moment to realise what book this was. It's called Northern Lights in the UK. I thought it was a good book, and I agree with Cog: it's ironic that in the US (a country of democracy and freedom of speech) there can be banning books.
It makes me angry that schools are banning all of these modern books. The whole point of teaching literature is to make kids excited about reading [which is why I'm against teaching boring books like Charles Dickens and that kind of stuff] and when they say that children can't read exceptional books that they would enjoy to read, it's absolutely stupid.
Actually this is in Canada. And the school board can ban it from the school library. Kids can bring it from home, but the school doesn't have to supply the book for them. Kind of stupid really. Its more anti-big organized religion then anti-God.
Ooops :redface: That was an embarrassing gaff to make... And I agree Dom. I'm religious myself, and it didn't particularly offend me (I thought the beginning was a little slow, but that's a different matter). I do tend to be fairly liberal, but I think that it's extremely close minded to do something like this. The next step will be book burnings, and then before you know it, we'll all be brainwashed and cheering at Nuremburg again.
Hasn't this book been recently made into an actual film? If so, the trailer I watched a few days ago didn't look too convincing. Far too many graphics for my liking.
I read "The Diary of Anne Frank" in elementary school and "To Kill a Mockingbird" in highschool. If the topics in those books weren't graphically distressing to the school boards, I wonder at the mentality of those that would ban a children's book. Even if it is viewed as being adult-oriented, prejudice resulting in genocide (where a child is forced into adult situations to deal with hatred), and a boy who swears and acts worse than a military man on leave, isn't? I can understand, applaud even, a parent supervising their child's reading habits. For an organization to take over that hallowed duty is an exercise in futile ignornace.
I second that. Wasn't there a bit of a controversy when some school libraries banned Harry Potter as advocating witchcraft or something to that effect? I remember reading something about that.
A year ago I would ahve agreed with you lessa but not anymore. I can't go to anywhere and talk about religion without someone using the Da Vinci Code as evidince (I certainly wish I had another example). "Jesus was a great prophet not the son of god. The Christians made him the son of god at so and so." I can't tell you how many times I've heard this and many other historical inaccuracies. The people who say it can't even get the inaccuracies right (Brown claime dit was the Council of Nicea). When I ask where they learned this they say its in the Da Vinci Code, or some other fictional work. These are adults and teenagers by the way I'm speaking of. I support Dan Browns right to make a book and personally I don't feel threatened by the book itself but I become frustrated when people use Brown as evidence to attack my faith. Any historian, even a athiest historian, can tear any historical value of that book apart ten different ways. Its certainly different with the Golden Compass, which is a much clearer work of fiction. Is banning the book fair? No its not. You can't ban one book because it disagrees with you but allow other books because they do. Its certainly unconstitutional. The problem with America today is that people make decisions based on emotion and bias not logic or law. I oppose homosexual marriage and abortion morally and emotionally, but there is nothing I can do about it because nothing in the US Constitution or the law prohibits either of these actions. But to think a child isn't influenced by what they see and read is reckless. I think we give human beings a little too much credit because frankly most people are book smart, street smart, but not very good free thinkers. Atheists, Christians, and everyone else alike. Its rare that a true free thinker comes along. Most people listen to what others say and do and just copy them with no real understanding of what they are doing. I cite dozens of different people in my life who have attacked something with a complete misunderstanding of what that something is (War, politics, religion, nearly everything) and say that so and so said it was true, so it must be true. I used to think differently but recent months, after leaving my old community to go to college, have taught me very differently. There is a legitimate fear that a book about killing god will hurt Christianity, but I'm also fairly certain its overblown and not as big a threat as destroying ones right to say what they think. The Christian god is one of understanding and love, not opression and ignorance.
The upside of banning a book is, there's no better way to guarantee that people will read it. There's a list of books that have been banned, or have tried to be banned here: http://http://www.banned-books.com/bblista-i.html The first two on the list are: The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and American Heritage Dictionary, 1969. **snort** If I ever get a book published, I hope someone'll try to ban it. It looks like yesterday's Banned Book is tomorrow's Best Seller.
Does it count when the group being told what they are not allowed to read is a group of children. They are told what they may or may not eat, wear, and listen to. How is this any different from reading? Also, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the ruling, but I think this is definitely something to think about.
