I replied to one of your previous posts asking this same question. I’ll copy and paste my previous response:
“You’re right. But to be sure, let’s check our meth, I mean, math. Let’s check our math. Substitute the word “book” for something more creative. Many stories have a hero, or heroine. Let’s go with heroine. The heroine, is not being “forced” on the children by way of the curriculum. Rather, it’s safely kept just down the hall in the school library. Learning about the heroine is not mandatory. So if there was to be an encounter, it would be the child’s fault for “choosing” to learn about the heroine.”
Sam, I think in the eyes of the opposing parents, some of the content they oppose has been deemed to be harmful enough to the development of their children that they not only don’t want it in the curriculum, but they also don’t want it anywhere on school grounds. In my low-browed failed attempt at word play, I compared the harmful content to heroin and meth. I think it’s the position of the opposing parents that children shouldn’t be expected to make these types of decisions by themselves when their parents are not, and in many cases legally cannot be with them. For a more innocuous comparison, would it be okay if the school cafeteria had alcohol vending machines available for teachers to purchase from? And if they did, would it be the fault of the child for choosing to purchase alcohol for their own underage consumption? The burden of preventing children from purchasing alcohol falls 100% on the adult in any given situation. This is the best way I can think of to convey what the opposing parents might be feeling about the removal of explicit content in school libraries.