It's "out there," so the kids are going to learn about this sometime. It's best that we discuss it in class.

Educators who feel this way are not respecting the role of parents. Because the school refuses to proactively inform parents about the content of these books, topics such as teen sex, incest, bestiality, rape, and occultism are being discussed behind the parents' backs. This means that parents are intentionally left out of the loop in the current 'education' of their own children regarding many extremely important and serious topics including the use of profanity, sexuality choices, the use of drugs and alcohol, and child abuse. Sadly, the books often promote ideas and values that are opposite of the values taught in the child's home.

Furthermore, this attitude by teachers also shows disrespect for the English language! Would you expect the band or music teacher to require your child to study how Madonna and Eminem use the f-word, sexually-stimulating words and actions, and other vulgarities in their music just because it's "out there?" Would you want your child's athletic coach to require your child to engage in discussions on the sex life, use of obscenities, and violence among athletes just because it's "out there?" The answer to these problems is NOT to surreptitiously discuss books that promote values that most Clearview parents are deeply opposed to behind parents' backs in the form of a required English assignment, yet this what is currently happening.

The kids need to read this stuff to prepare for college

According to whom? According to many colleges, no, the kids do NOT need to read any of the offensive titles to be well prepared for college or these tests.

These books are interesting to the kids.

Playboy would also be interesting to some kids. So? Think back to your own education and your own favorite teacher. What was the subject? Chemistry? History? Math? A good teacher can make any subject that they are truly knowledgeable and enthusiastic about "interesting to the kids." A teacher who must rely on books that contain tawdry sex and f-words in order to engage interest really has no business being in front of children all day.

This argument is so illogical, it's offensive to anyone who really thinks about it. Taken in context, a passage is much clearer, understandable, and memorable. Taken in context, sex becomes even more vivid, impressive, and fascinating. Does it surprise anyone that feeding teens a steady diet of sexually-stimulating books awakens their appetite to read more of the same? Does it seem logical or not that feeding teens a diet of sexually-stimulating books might awaken or accelerate their appetite for sexual experimentation? Taken in context, the offensive material often takes on an entirely new level of danger and influence.

What? How can "excerpts" be too specific? The excerpts are exactly what they are intended and defined to be -- a small taste of the ingredients used to create the story. Yes, many of these excerpts are extremely repugnant, crude, and unacceptable to parents, especially given the fact that a lifetime's worth of GREAT LITERATURE exists that could be easily selected for our kids. The obscene books hurt our children in two ways -- they mentally assault our kids causing immeasurable mental and social harm, and they also steal the opportunity for that child to read a title of positive literary value.

This flawed excuse displays ignorance about the word "censorship." It also supports an abdication of the fundamental responsibilities of our educator. First of all, PURE Pioneers has never suggested that books should be removed from libraries or that any parent who wants their child to read a particular book should not be allowed to do so. Keeping parents IN the loop on the actual education of their children so they CAN choose the best books for their children is one of the goals of PURE Pioneers. We obviously wouldn't need to tell you about the content in the assigned books at Clearview if the school was proactively informing parents about these subjects themselves! Besides, each public school library, and to a much greater extent, each teacher and class, must block out the vast number of books that are available because money and time only allow a given number of titles to be purchased for the libraries and a tiny fraction of that to be studied in class. So who is "the censor?"

Furthermore, removing a textbook from the curriculum and replacing it with a better textbook is not censorship, it's our obligation to our children which is based on common sense. Anyone using the word "censorship" to describe the goals of PURE Pioneers is using hysterics in order to hide from the real issues we are attempting to discuss -- an honest discussion about the content and messages many books are promoting, and how that relates to the mental and physical health of our minor children.

But if these books are so bad, why are we graduating so many good kids?

Yes, we have some really great kids at Clearview, but this argument is also very warped. Yes, many good kids have triumphed over many bad situations. So? This argument implies that requiring kids to read books with many graphic, indecent situations as well as extreme profanity actually contributes to their wholesome character! No, the fact that many great kids have achieved in spite of this nonsense simply speaks to the strength of their families. Unlike many of the books the children are recommended to read, most families are NOT encouraging their children to use the f-word and to become sexually active.

This argument is truly a sad one as it shows neither a true understanding of Shakespeare nor a true understanding of the spirit and motives of the PURE Pioneers Web site. Yes, Shakespeare discusses serious subjects such as love, murder, drugs, and violence. But Shakespeare's works contain neither a pervasive nor gratuitous amount of sex, violence, or vulgarity. They do not teach our children about new types of sex nor do they invoke sexually stimulating feelings through explicit passages. Unlike many of our other books, a student or teacher who "talks like Shakespeare" would not be breaking other Clearview codes of conduct nor would they be kicked out of school for sexual harassment. Shakespeare's characters do not go through undeveloped, implausible, unresolved, vulgar, sexually-charged, and otherwise morally repugnant storylines found in some of the other books on the recommended reading list. As Shakespeare's characters work through their humorous, tragic, or dramatic roles, they teach us something about true character and a tremendous amount about the art of creative writing. No, we do not oppose Shakespeare. We consider his works to be an obvious cornerstone of a fundamentally sound education in English literature.