>

It's easy to make political book banning sound reasonable when you simply replace the book with Hitler's book.
Least favorite thing Reddit does: swap out the actual thing we're talking about for Hitler instead of debating the actual thing we're talking about.
They should write a report on why it needs to be banned with examples given from the books.
I'm tired of people just giving opinions without actually citing examples.
"Ban this book because bad" is not only lazy but often nowhere near accurate to what the books even talk about. >

Nah, this is one of those things that tickles the jollies of liberals but would be ineffective in real life, like everything the Church of Satan does.
The problem isn't the irony of them banning books they haven't read. The problem is them banning books that don't align with their political agenda. 
I don't care if they've read the book or not. >

Get enough people exposed and actually reading the thing they "hate" is actually a very effective way of combating said problem, if not impractical. :/ >

This might makes sense if they respected books. Book banning of this scale indicates a profound lack of respect. >

Yeah, I agree. Of course, these parents would never do that, though. >

Hey, your name is very cool! <3 >


I was just listening to John Green talk about one of his books being banned and its just so apparent that those people have never read more than 2 or 3 lines of his book before calling it "porn".

What book are you talking about?
Are people literally trying to have it banned, or just not have it stocked in school libraries for inappropriate age groups? >

Found the person who wants to ban books. >

I don't think any book should be banned, but there are books that are inappropriate for a school library (especially for Elementary and Junior High School). For example, if people want to spend money to buy Mein Kampf that's up to them but it should never be stocked in a public (or school) library.