* banned as required reading in public school
* banned from public school libraries
* banned as required reading in all schools
* banned from all school libraries
* banned from public libraries
* banned for everyone

Here in the US, children are required to be schooled, generally through high school. Most parents find themselves with no choice except to send their children to public schools. Furthermore, the parents are not able to monitor what goes on in the classroom.

Public schools necessarily have to be places that will not offend the sensibilities (religious, moral, or otherwise) of the students and their parents. Consider the current conflicts between school uniform requirements and Muslim head-scarves.

Personally, I think that *required* reading in public schools does need to be carefully screened. Forcing children to read material that their parents would forbid them to read is unacceptable to me.

For optional reading in public schools, including stocking on school library shelves, I’m neutral. I can see both arguments. There’s nothing stopping the child from going to the public library and reading the book there.

Banning from non-public schools is unacceptable to me. Parents have a choice here. If they don’t like what the school teaches, they can put their child in a different school. (I’m talking about banning by the government here; the non-public school is free to choose its books.)

Banning from public libraries is unacceptable to me. Public libraries requiring parental consent before children can access questionable materials is borderline. It seems to me that if parents care, they can accompany their children. Compared to the WWW, the contents of a public library is tame.

Banning *everyone* from reading a book is not just unacceptable to me, it’s outrageous.

Personally, I’m more concerned about the potential collapse of the public library systems in the US. That would deprive a significant segment of our population from access to even the tamest of books.