|
|
|
#21
12-09-2007, 06:34 PM
|
|||||
|
|||||
I personally think banning books is ridiculous and somewhat pointless. There was many books (Stephen King, RL Stine, Ann Rice, VC Andrews) I wasn't supposed to read when I was younger but I always found a way to get a hold of them and read them aways. I think weather a book is banned or not if a person wants to read it they'll find a way to do so.
__________________
One more fish should be ok?, right!!!  - Laurie
|
|
#22
12-09-2007, 07:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I agree fishaholic!
I have all the VC Andrews books. Started reading them in 7th grade ('97 for me) and have bought all of them since. I can see why some of them were banned, but it's not like banning them will solve the problem. I personally don't see the problem with the classics like Huckleberry Finn, Tom Sawyer, Of Mice and Men, To Kill A Mockingbird. Sure they use racist language and what have you, but when taken in context of when they were written, that's just the way life was. Hell, I heard that A Scarlet Letter was banned too. IMO, it's stupid.
__________________
I'm Melody (or Panda )50g cube SW tank (24x24x20) w/20g sump and internal overflow box, Coralife 24" 2 x 65W Aqualight, skimmer, and 2x HOB filters It has approx 35lbs live rock, clownfish, 1 black & white saddleback clownfish, asst'd mushrooms, asst'd zoas, gsp, turbo and other snails, blue legged, halloween and other hermit crabs, tuxedo urchin 10g FW tank with... Current occupants are cardinal tetras and ameca splendons
|
|
#23
12-09-2007, 10:15 PM
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Not to deviate from the topic but...
It is interesting to note that many of the same people who would protest the loudest about banning thought (not anyone here of course) would also claim that the debate on global warming is over and won't entertain the notion of using nuclear powerplants. It's funny how we all seem to have our blind spots.
|
Linear Mode
