Published Sunday, October 05, 2008

We shouldn't tell others what they can and can't read

Editorial

Editor's note: Today's guest editorial is from the Jopline (Mo.) Globe.

As varied as "King Lear," "Call of the Wild," "Harry Potter," "My Friend Flicka" and "To Kill a Mockingbird" are from each other, the books all have one thing in common.

At some point in their history, they have been banned -- some even burned -- because there was something in them that someone deemed "objectionable." ...

We believe the availability of "Little Red Riding Hood," and "Arabian Nights" in a public library is a must. We can't imagine growing up without reading "Little House on the Prairie," or Dr. Seuss' "The Lorax." But somewhere out there are people who have successfully challenged all of these books, keeping them out of public libraries and out of the hands of the children who visit those taxpayer-supported institutions.

The American Library Association and other groups, including us, believe it's important that you know there are those out there who are challenging books. Banned Books Week -- a celebration of titles that have been challenged or banned in public and school libraries across the country -- ended Saturday.

The observance celebrated "the freedom to choose or the freedom to express one's opinion even if that opinion might be considered unorthodox or unpopular, and stresses the importance of ensuring the availability of those unorthodox or unpopular viewpoints to all who wish to read them."

When it comes to telling others what they can and can't read, we say "Mind your own business."