I am glad to see that Andy Cilley agrees that restaurants should not serve tainted food that might sicken, or even kill, diners (“Be picky about library offerings,” Our Readers’ Views, July 29).
His analogy falls flat when applied to the books on offer in our public libraries. Even if libraries were entirely funded by property taxes, which taxpayers would decide which books would be available to patrons and which would be pulled? Should libraries pull books on evolution because creationists object? Which books on climate, religion and spirituality, race and racism, history, politics—and, yes, sexuality and gender—would be allowed to remain on the shelves? (Please note that libraries provide opt-in systems for parents to monitor and restrict their young children’s checkouts.)
Unlike botulism and salmonella, books and ideas do not sicken or kill. And without exposure to a full menu of ideas from very different sources, we cannot engage, which is basic to a democratic society. To cite the American Library Association in 1953: “Most attempts at suppression (of books) rest on a denial of the fundamental premise of democracy: that the ordinary individual, by exercising critical judgment, will select the good and reject the bad.” Think about it—and thank a librarian that you can.
