|
|
|
|
|
|
by slowmovintarget
1241 days ago
|
|
|
Encouraging children to read is not covered by the law. You read the article. Having a library of books is an easy way to encourage literacy, probably even the best way. It is not the only way. Far more important to the development of literacy in children is the presence of books in the home. There are decades of statistics on the impact of just having a stack of books in the same home as the child. All of this is also failing to touch on the problem that drew this overreaction. To be sure it is a huge over-extension of what the government ought to do. But the thing it was a reaction to... That never had anything to do with literacy, and everything to do with ideology. When one uses literacy as the shield, and depends on the perpetual good graces of people one has spent years demonizing on ideological grounds, one should expect damage to the very thing everyone thought was sacrosanct. |
|
|
Of course, but that's not something schools have control over. Unless they can give a child a book on loan to take home. And that requires books in the school. And because different children have different interests and different reading issues, a wide selection of books is better than a narrow one.
> That never had anything to do with literacy, and everything to do with ideology.
Do you mean that the ban is about ideology, sacrificing children's access to reading in order to indoctrinate them into a state-approved ideology?
> When one uses literacy as the shield, and depends on the perpetual good graces of people one has spent years demonizing on ideological grounds, one should expect damage to the very thing everyone thought was sacrosanct.
They clearly don't think it's sacrosanct if they're sacrificing it this eagerly to hurt the people they want to demonize. I guess we're talking about gay people here? They want to demonize gay people, and want to restrict the book supply in order to indoctrinate children with that?