From: "Strong, Lee" <StrongL at MTMC.ARMY.MIL>
To: "'WSFA members'" <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Burning at the Stake
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:33:56 -0400
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

	Actually, Ted, I believe that I responded to your earlier statement,
but, perhaps, more subtly than you realized.  Allow me to be more direct:
	Your earlier statement that parents who are concerned about their
children's reading are repressives who are trying to shield their children
from life is a wildly incorrect overstatement probably true in a few cases
but certainly not in all cases.  A responsible, loving parent guides his or
her child, introducing the child to life at a pace that the child can
handle.  Children **are** naive during their youth and benefit from the
guidance of a mature mentor.  In my own case, I naturally resented some of
the restrictions that my parents (an English teacher and a medical doctor)
established when I was young, but they relaxed the restrictions as I
matured, and now I appreciate their concern for my well being.  And, no, I'm
not an intellectual carbon copy of either of them as a result of their
guidance.
	The reason why I mentioned the Shaver Mystery is because you
previously condemned me vigorously for even reading about said Mystery [Hoax
actually].  Your present call for free inquiry rings hollow when you have
previously condemned the results of free inquiry.  Ditto the NAACP and
M*A*S*H.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ted White [mailto:twhite8 at cox.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 10:43 AM
To: WSFA members
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Burning at the Stake

----- Original Message -----
From: "Strong, Lee" <StrongL at MTMC.ARMY.MIL>
To: "'WSFA members'" <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 7:57 AM
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Burning at the Stake

> Unless, of course, those children stumble onto the Shaver Mystery or
> disagree with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People
> or don't find _M*A*S*H_ entertaining... in which case they're obviously
> inferior and unworthy beings who must be denounced vehemently on chat
lists
> and suffer other forms of social disapproval.

Huh?   This doesn't seem to be a response to my statement that "Every child
should rebell against such parents by reading as widely and voraciously as
he or she can."   Unless of course you think that kids *believe* everything
they read.   But the more widely and voraciously any kid reads, the better
worldview he or she will have, and the less nonsense he or she will
believe.   Reading widely means reading opposing points of view.   Kids are
neither naive or stupid when they are widely read; they have the ability to
sort wheat from chaff.    I have no idea how the NAACP or "M*A*S*H" figure
into this -- unless you're referring to the *books* published by the author
of the original M*A*S*H novel (of which there were at least a half dozen).

--Ted White