I disagree with the writer’s views in the letter “Many parents happy with NLB decision” (July 15). We each have the right to educate our children in our preferred manner in the privacy of our respective spaces.
I believe in not sheltering my children but raising them as well-informed young adults familiar with the practical social realities of our complex world. Others believe their children are impressionable and must be protected from practices they deem deviant.
It is fine to disagree because I have no more right to decide how other children should be educated than other parents have to decide for mine.
If, however, we allow our children to step out of our respective spaces and interact with others in this shared space called society, we must accept that they will have to face and deal with views that differ from ours.
Accordingly, in this public space, no single group has the right to dictate what material should be made unavailable for our children’s collective education in our national library, which is funded with our money.
If any of us are uncomfortable with this, we can mutually agree on separate guidelines for, say, supervised or restricted access to items deemed sensitive. We do not get to ban or destroy one another’s books in this common space.
To tolerate is to disagree but to allow. For example, one may disagree with my definition of family but one allows the book And Tango Makes Three to be in our library.
I may disagree with the Bible, but I would allow a Noah’s Ark children’s book in our library. I would be just as upset if the latter were removed.
One need not support the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender movement to allow an LGBT-themed book in our library; one need only tolerate it.
I am puzzled as to whether the writer, by supporting a ban on an LGBT-themed book in our library, understands truly what tolerance means.
Yong Kai Chang
* Letter appeared in Voice of TODAYOnline (17 Jul)