From: "Strong, Lee" <StrongL at MTMC.ARMY.MIL>
To: "'WSFA members'" <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Burning at the Stake (Not!)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 15:34:09 -0400
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

	Well, I generally view parents being protective of their children
including their children's reading as a positive exercise of parental
responsibility.  However, others see a reasonable protective concern as a
wholesale assault on the First Amendment, and I believe that we can address
reasonable concerns without labeling those people 'loons.'
	For the record, I've labeled people 'loons' but I believe that my
labeling had a significantly different basis.
	Concerning religion, you are correct.  Most children's books, like
most science fiction books, deal with religion by ignoring it.  What you
don't know won't hurt you.

-----Original Message-----
From: Samuel Lubell [mailto:lubell at boo.net]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 11:55 AM
To: WSFA members
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Burning at the Stake (Not!)

At 10:19 AM 4/14/03 -0400, you wrote:
>         (Yawnnn.)
>         Gee whiz, Mike, I thought you or Mr. Pullman were talking about
>something **controversial**.  People have been "dealing with organized
>religion and God in a rather less than complimentary way" for thousands of
>years.  Got anything **new** for us to talk about?

Yes they have, but rarely in *children's books*.  As the controversy over
Harry Potter shows, many people are protective of what they think their
children are exposed to.