Book controversy at William Byrd High School
Alternative content
Book controversy at William Byrd High School
A parent complained about the content of a book calledEditor’s Note: Just a reminder to commenters. Please stay on topic, and avoid devolving into personal attacks, insults, or otherwise flaming your fellow commenters. Everyone has a right to express their opinion on this topic, and interested readers want to know what you have to say specifically about this story.
Roanoke County Schools is examining whether a 10-year-old book should be allowed in the William Byrd High School library, following a complaint from a parent about the book’s content.
The book is called “Perks of Being a Wallflower.“ The school system says a teacher at the school gave the book to an 11th grade student in her English class, and then that student shared the book with a friend who is a boy.
The boy’s father, John Davis, is the one who made the complaint to William Byrd’s principal.
“I found some disturbing things in it,“ Davis told me.
The book contains a series of letters written by a supposed new high school student, about what they observe, to a random person. Those observations include sex, suicide, rape, violence, as well as drug and alcohol abuse.
Davis learned that the book was part of a collection of the American Library Association’s banned books, brought in by the English teacher.
“When you see things like banned books and things not supposed to do, what are kids gonna do they want it?“ Davis said.
After receiving the complaint, the principal had the school library’s two copies removed. The book is being reviewed under Roanoke County Public School’s “established policy relating to challenged material,“ according to a news release from the school system.
When 10 On Your Side contacted Roanoke County Schools about the book being in both the library and the teacher’s classroom Tuesday afternoon, we received this statement:
“We can confirm that a teacher did hand out the book “Wallflower” to a student in her english class. Apparently, that student shared it with her boyfriend, whose father brought the matter to the attention of the school. The principal had two copies of the book removed from the library, and it is being reviewed under the school system’s policy relating to challenged material.“
A news release sent out later Tuesday afternoon from the Roanoke Co. School Board said the principal took “appropriate personnel action,“ but the school system would not elaborate, citing long-standing practice to not publicly comment on action taken against individual school employees.
———-
Read the full news release from the Roanoke Co. School Board below:
There have been a number of articles on websites and in the news media regarding a book called the “Perks of Being a Wallflower.“ We can confirm that a teacher did give this book to a student in her English class at the student’s request. Apparently, that student shared the book with a male friend, whose father brought the book to the attention of the school principal.
Upon receiving a complaint from this father, the principal had the two copies of the book removed from the school library, and the book is being reviewed under the school system’s established policy relating to challenged material. The book had been placed in the school library using established procedures relating to library material. The principal also took appropriate personnel action. It has been the long-standing practice of the school system not to publicly comment on action taken with regard to individual employees and, in keeping with that practice, we do not intend to comment on the action taken in this case.
The School Board was unaware of the book, its presence in any school library, and “banned book week.“ The School Board has directed the school system administration to review the system’s long-standing procedures for accepting books for school libraries.
Editor’s Note: Just a reminder to commenters. Please stay on topic, and avoid devolving into personal attacks, insults, or otherwise flaming your fellow commenters. Everyone has a right to express their opinion on this topic, and interested readers want to know what you have to say specifically about this story.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
By the way, the concerned father, John Davis, is doing some street preaching at the Vinton Fall Festival in this video clip:
http://www.tangle.com/view_video?viewkey=ad2b799f72ea3a6ed006
You may have to copy and paste it into your Address Bar…
Take these words to heart. If you don’t, they’ll be a witness against you on the Day of Judgment…
http://www.roanoke.com/columnists/casey/wb/222100
I’m just very surprised that the adults here are still keeping this debate going, even after they have demoralized william byrd students for being “illequipped”. We are all over it, it’s all over with.
Like, why are you still commenting on this site?! GET A LIFE!
Sharitta, You said, “Hey, wanted to jump in and remind everyone that just because something is included in a book, it doesn’t mean it is endorsed. The Bible has homosexuality, fornication, murder and incest in it. I guess we should take that out of school libraries too.“ This was covered in previous posts by Bookborn & others, but I know it’s an ocean of words through which to wade, but again…. You commit the logical fallacy of false analogy. The Bible does not use graphic detailed descriptions of any of those mentioned actions and certainly doesn’t leave you in the dark as to the Author’s feelings of those matters. The Bible often uses poetic language for intercourse, “Adam KNEW Eve, and she conceived.“ When the Bible speaks of a menstrual period, it says, “The custom of women is upon me.“ This is beautiful literature. Perks is plain Jane vernacular vulgar/vomit. Even when the men of Sodom wanted to rape God’s men, it says, “Send them out that we may KNOW them.“ One can read the Perks book and not be warned whatsoever against the sin, perversion, and danger of Sodom-y, etc. Yet, the Bible very clearly says in Lev.18 that if a man lies with mankind, as with womankind, it is an ABOMINATION. It very clearly says that the Effeminate shall NOT inherit the Kingdom of God (I Cor. 6). It clearly denounces s0d0my & women w/ women (lesbianism) in Romans chapter 1. God says in Deut. that there shall be NO SOD-OMITE among the children of Israel. The Mosaic law condemned incest, etc. It says that adulterers and wh0remongers, GOD WILL JUDGE (Heb. 13). It says that f0rnicators will have their part in the lake of fire and brimstone (Rev.). It also says, “Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? By taking heed thereunto according to THY WORD.“ In short, the Bible will keep you FROM ALL THOSE SINS AND PER-VERSION if indeed you heed it’s warnings. It says that fornication is a sin against your body (I Cor. 5-6), etc. Perks offers to no hope (the boy winds up a mental case, stark naked, staring at a TV which is turned off, while his own pilot light is blown out). As was said earlier by others, Perks doesn’t ‘tackle issues’—as was erroneously reported in the media clip & couldn’t tackle a tipsy toddler toting a ton of toys. The Bible TACKLES these issues. As others have articulated so well, you cannot comprehend this since you have no basis for rational thought, intelligibility, and you cannot account for laws of logic, morality, laws of physics. By the way, the Bible is certainly the most banned book of all history. The Bible, however, WILL KEEP YOU FROM SIN, or SIN WILL KEEP YOU FROM THE BIBLE.
Interesting exchange. Whew. A bunch of reading.
Give it a rest!!!!!!!
Larkin21,
I hope you will try and restrain the desire to assume things that are not stated nor part of a discussion (not enough time to chronicle all of them).
It isn’t ironic that I was quoting Jefferson and Madison, it was intentional for the reasons you deem ironic. They don’t quote the bible nor consider it establishing religion to make laws imposing morality that they held to be ‘self evident’. (Were they homophobes? Were they against bestiality?) I never assumed or stated that they were establishing the Christian religion and I even held religion and morality in contradistinction.
In a purely rational stand point however Christianity is the only religion or philosophy that holds a monopoly on any truth whatsoever. That was not my point in the post you responded to.
But since you desire to free your mind from the restraints of a religious worldview (and destroy rationality thereby) I will ask the question again:
Where is the line between morality and religion? The founding fathers drew the line by appealing to the laws of nature and natures God and did not consider this religion. How do you disagree with this? Do you contend morality is based on atheism? Say on.
Hey, wanted to jump in and remind everyone that just because something is included in a book, it doesn’t mean it is endorsed. The Bible has homosexuality, fornication, murder and incest in it. I guess we should take that out of school libraries too.
I graduated from Mr. Jefferson’s University, Benny J, so I know full well who he is and what he did with his life. I want to know where you get the authority to assume that any founding father was referring to any specific religion or God, much less your definition of a Christian God, based on their use of words like “our Creator” and “laws of nature.“ I am sorry, but Christianity does not hold a monopoly on any of those terms. It is ironic that you choose Jefferson and Madison as your examples when Jefferson himself wrote the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom and Madison was careful to include the same ideas of religious freedom (following Jefferson’s leadership) when he authored the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Taking a couple steps back, I never claimed to prove anyone wrong. I only claimed that some people use the Bible as the absolute word of God while conveniently ignoring that there are things we do in our everyday lives that the Bible clearly states are abominations. Now, perhaps you have another interpretation of those passages but that only highlights another point and that is that even Christians, even Christians of the same denomination and even Christians who go to the same church and even Christians in the same family, cannot agree on how to interpret the Bible. If even these people cannot agree and if this country is NOT a theocracy, how do you suppose to use the Bible as evidence in a discussion on public policy?
It is very simple to have a discussion about morality without including religious texts. When you step out and away from the Bible, you can state exactly why you have a problem with “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” and those who disagree with you can state exactly why they believe that students (and, heck, even adults since the father told FoxNews that he didn’t think anyone should read the book) have the right to have access to such a book.
I’ll start. You say the book is pornography. (Do you need the Bible to have come to that conclusion? I doubt it.) I say the book is not pornography. Webster’s Dictionary defines pornography as “the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement.“ If the book’s purpose was sexual excitement, then more of the book would have been sexually explicit that would actually excite the intended audience (young adults). If you have read the book, you see a main character who is outraged over the rape he witness and confused by the molestation he encountered at the hands of his aunt. Do you think this excites young adults? Do you think it encourages young adults to rape their significant others or to molest children? The five or six young adults I know who have read this book do not feel compelled to rape or molest anyone from reading the book. In fact, they are the ones who are supportive of friends who have been sexually victimized. Those who have been victims themselves realize that they are not alone and that they can stop the cycle and overcome what has happened to them.
By the way, I keep score when I’m playing games, not when I’m discussing issues.
[Continued from Below]… Furthermore, nobody has satisfactorily answered the dilemma you face that if the Perks book was put into movie format (with all the graphic, explicit details depicted on screen), you would have a very different reaction to its availability to students. Why? You draw the line with white supremacist hate literature being given to children, but you CANNOT give us a BASIS for your rationale or for your morality. Instead of appealing to a transcendent basis for morality/ethics/logic, you set yourself up as the arbitrary final authority. We see that this approach is FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED and the proving ground is the children & schools that are getting progressively worse, godless, wholly given over to their own whimsical lusts, disrespectful to elders (we saw references to the elderly smelling like nursing home excrement in a prior post), etc. You cannot account for your standards of morality and you have no rational basis for logic. Emotionally-laden discourse and opinion becomes your baseless philosophy. We see the fruits of this leavening of vain philosophy in our schools and in the Perks book. One brave father, John Davis, decided to stand against the tsunami of sickness overtaking students/staff & simply demanded answers. He never asked for any teacher to be fired. He wanted to know the other “whole row”of books that were made available to the students by Mrs. Renard and to this day, THIS HAS NOT BEEN REVEALED. So, he took the matter to the press. He is the unsung hero. He loves his son and wants the best for him and this burden of his heart was manifest in this mess. I commend him. If more parents actually cared about their children’s welfare & eternal destiny, we’d see a change in our youth for the betterment of society. Parents, go and read the posts by the children and get your children out of this sinking ship before it’s eternally too late. It’s too late to salvage the ship (if indeed it was ever afloat; I’m inclined to think otherwise & our founding forefathers insightfully predicted the failure of public schools). The Bible predicted that in the last days “evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse” & that there would be “perilous times…Men shall be lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God, disobedient to parents, proud…” These times are certainly upon us. These posts have made this glaringly evident with neon clues that only the willfully ignorant could miss. WAKE UP, PARENTS… Can I plead with you a brief moment? Dear people, Jesus Christ, your God and Creator, died on the cross for these very sins, was buried, and rose again the 3rd day. The good news is that He will save you & make you His child. The Holy Bible does offer hope in the midst of this darkness. If you’ll repent of your sins, and respond to His calling to save you, you can be a born again child of God & heaven bound. Belief in the Christian God is a necessary precondition for intelligibility. You cannot account for the universal laws of logic, laws of morality, laws of physics in an atheistic natural universe. You must borrow from the Christian theistic worldview when using these laws. You have no transcendent basis for morality & chaos & anarchy reigns. Love warns. I wouldn’t wish H.E.L.L. on my worst enemy. “Seek ye the Lord while He may be found. Call upon Him while He is near.”
Thank you for all the posts! Some observations were apparent during this dialogue. Indeed, this has been VERY educational & enlightening! To summarize: The public schools are getting worse and worse, more and more plunging into the depths of depravity, debauchery, heathenistic hedonism, uncontrolled/unchecked lusts, etc. According to YOUR OWN TESTIMONIES (not mine - refer to previous posts), William Byrd & other schools commonly (according to a present senior, etc.) experience sex in empty closets & classrooms (“perhaps thousands of times” & “everybody knows this” & it’s kept from the parents), use of the most vulgar of cursing by the majority of the student body (“90%”), bestiality at parties “for laughs”, overdoses on drugs and “you know what” is done to boys & girls, bragging about oral sex & sex-capades & parties over the weekend during every lunch… It was asserted that a casual stroll down the hallways of William Byrd or a visit to a school dance will reveal that the contents of the book are commonplace or compounded (even worse) in reality! Teacher(s) have done inappropriate things that should have been reported but were not. Parents have joined in on parties. One poster said that Private Christian schools contain weekly episodes of girls involved in anal sex, youth involved in homosexual acts, orgies, etc. Sadly, there’s been an unusual amount of suicides at WBHS in recent years (again, these are things that students offered). Mrs. Renard is the best and coolest teacher it is said (the English usage, critical thinking, spelling, grammar of her students’ posts are revealing). She SHOULD be allowed to give a child/young adult anything that they ask for and the blame is on the parents and never her. (Imagine a pedophile or drug pusher standing before a Judge & employing such convoluted logic & saying, “The child ASKED me to do this. The PARENTS should have done a better job of raising the child & so I’m not responsible & the child & parents should be on trial & not me…”). The majority consensus is that the Perks book is a wonderful book despite explicit graphic & detailed references to mature themes such as male/female masturbation, sodomy, rape in the presence of a child, voyeurism, sadomasochism, bestiality, pedophilia, etc. One said they loved the book & will stand for the book forever even if it means taking it South of Heaven, though this person began their posts asserting they were “Christian.” Again, I’m just recapping the previous posts. Another asserts that masturbation is not a sin in the Bible (argument from silence – logical fallacy; cocaine abuse would not be a sin either if that’s the case) or use of vulgarity other than God’s name in vain. (The Bible speaks against lasciviousness & such like in Gal. 5 & Eph. 4 says “Let NO corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth but only that is good” & many more references could be given). There was a time when the Bible was a textbook & such Biblical illiteracy didn’t abound. A failure to see the dichotomy between ceremonial & moral law, theocracy versus government by men, Old & New Testament dispensations, etc. resulted in mudslinging at our Maker in prior posts. No one seemed to comment on the fact that Dr. Turner told John Davis that the Perks book was garbage/filth & he wouldn’t allow his 2 students at Hidden Valley to read them & that the book was banned from WBHS, & that Turner said that Renard SHOULD NOT have given the book out & that Banned Book Week is a bad idea, & that Renald had “no good rationale” for giving the child the book. This is per John Davis, he told this to John Davis at 12:30 PM on 10/2/09. So, the principal disagrees with all of you on the merits/value of Perks & the teacher’s rationale for making the book available. [Continued Above]…
Advertisement