This is emerging.
Apart from the questions everybody will be asking about 1st Amendment rights, the function of libraries and so forth, I have a few.
1a) Did the author write this thing thinking "Oh, what a charming story for children. It'll be right there with 'Charlotte's Web' and 'Make Way For Ducklings'?"
1b) Is there any chance in hell that the author had no clue about the controversial nature of the work?
1c) Can there be any doubt whatsoever that there is an ulterior motive at work here?
2a) Is there any possibility that the people who approved the book to be shelved in an ELEMENTARY school's library weren't favorably disposed to introducing this into the environment?
2b) Did any of them even once think, "This is wrong for children of elementary school age?"
2c) Conversely, how many thought, "If we get 'em young, maybe they'll be more likely to wind up this way?"
3) And, finally, what is the point of a book like this? Is it necessary? Children's books are meant to teach. All the kids' books that wind up being even near-famous or worthwhile give lessons about not being jealous, or staying brave in the face of doubt, or being friendly or looking both ways before crossing the street - stuff that's useful for anybody of any stripe to learn early. What possible use could a gay children's book have?
I am a to-the-death defender of the freedom of speech, for all the shop-worn and cliche (read: truthful and proven) reasons. However, I am also a to-the-death proponent of the elimination of participation in those freedoms for anybody who abuses them or neglects their concomitant responsibilities. In short, use it with respect or give it up.
This is a crystalline example of somebody who needs to give it up. Forcibly if necessary.
