Library act is a slippery slope downward

In Mr. Barnes's letter, he argued the recent library act is good. However, the Oxford Dictionary defines censorship as "the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security."

Note the words "suppression" and "politically unacceptable." Putting books behind a locked door is suppression. This law is purely an artifact of the far right, which makes it political. Next, he insinuates librarians are displaying books with "sexual positions, sadomasochism, or torture." Thanks for the chuckle because there isn't a librarian anywhere who would do that. Have you seen that in the library? I've never experienced a librarian forcing me to see something lascivious. Do you know there are now rural libraries in Idaho that are "adults only" because they don't have the space to follow what this law says?

Lastly, does the far right also want to control our access the internet? Should the government place filters so that no one can see or read anything they deem unacceptable? No, because that would be government overreach. The same is true with libraries. Parents visit libraries with kids and help them choose books. They have control over what their children see. Parents set filters on their children's access to the internet and control what they see. The government has no place in that. Otherwise, we become no better than North Korea. It's a slippery slope.

BECCA PALMER

Sandpoint