The Book of Bunny Suicides should be banned from public schools.

Although i wish he had written his side of the argument at the start of round 1, i suppose its too late. I shall first address my opponents arguments, before i defend my own. 1. This is comparable to another book that is subsequently banned from High Schools: The Protocols of the learned elders of Zion. Both contain historical symbols, as well as controversial difficult to handle topics. Furthermore, the Protocols of the learned elders of Zion is considered a forgery, so in many ways, it is a parody of the original context, which was a transcript written by a french satirist entitled "Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquie"(1). However, the reason why this book is banned, is the same reason why my opponents book should be banned. An argument can be made that any inappropriate content is a controversial and difficult to handle topic. Racism. Slavery. Pornography. Yet, these topics are banned from High schools for a reason. The first being, controversial topics, although important, are not a requirement by educational standards for Students to learn about. This is why we dont have Pornography is art class. Remember, this is a High school ,were children grades 8 through 12, or sometimes 7 through 12, attend. And we are not talking about an elective class availeable only to grades 11 and 12. The second reason, is that without being placed in a proper guidance and perspective, a child will misunderstand the reason why the book is controversial, or the context of the black humour. In truth, Suicide is no joke, and by establishing that it is, there is a high degree of possibility that the child who doesnt understand Suicide, may take the subject too lightly. 2/3. This is true of Any book. Any book, regardless of Content, can encourage discussion and debate or include creativity. My opponet has failed miserably in bringing this point up, especially the fact about social studies, as this would be true of any book with even the shred of military reference. By educational purpose, perhaps my opponent has misunderstood what I meant. The educational purpose of any book is in direct regards to its content. Neither discussion nor creativity are the benchmarks of an acceptable book in high school standards, as any book can easily be regarded as Creative, and they can also induce discussion and debate. Take the kama sutra as an example. The graphic depiction of sex positions is extremely creative, as any scholar would agree. Yet, regardless, the content is the reason why the book is rejected. 4. I completely disagree. The topic of suicide has become something of a cultural icon. Things like Star Trek, where the Klingon race has a ritual suicide system,(2) to websites such as Encyclopedia Dramatica and 4chan. org, which have sprung several memes regarding the topic(3), to Goth literature and movies such as Twilight. I am not against teaching suicide, the consequences, and encourage discussion. However, my opponent has failed to understand how the system works. The way we teach our children, the way we peak their interest, is not "okay, we have to teach our students about Sex. So lets flood our library with Erotic literature and Kama Sutra for children". The proper method of teaching children is to do it in a classroom setting, under the guidance of a teacher and with a proper curriculum in place. Especially if the subject is taboo or controversial. The main point here, is that we teach children in Sex Ed class, at a certain grade. We dont let all kids from grades 1 through 12 access to porn, and let them figure it out for themselves. I am all up for allowing certain subjects to be taught at certain grades. Now, onto my rebuttle arguments concerning my opponents attacks against my own. 1. I would like my opponent to explain why the censorship of Bunnies suicides book is not necessarily the case, when we censor other things that are controversial and potentially harmful to children. 2. My opponent fails to understand the fact that he has just made a synonym. Limitation by federal statute, is by its very definition, censorship. My initial response towards censhorship, was after reading my opponents sources. (4) Pat McConnel states that the MOST convincing argument that he received, was that, and i quote: "she said she was convinced by arguments from review committee members, who recommended keeping the book, that any other action would be censorship. " I would like to ask my opponent to explain why animated depictions of suicide are not harmful, obscene or graphic. 3. First, there is no legal ramifications, just as there is no legal ramification to keep Erotic literature in school libraries. Yet, the reason we remove such literature, is because of the content. The ethical question here, is whether or not the children will be reading the book within the correct context. Should a child read about a graphic depiction of Rape in a novel, or should he learn what Rape is, and why it is wrong, beforehand by a teacher or gaurdian? 4. What does this point have to do with anything? Now, onto the pro contentions, although i have no idea what this serves to do, except to selfishly pander and promote himself. 1. Logical arguments are simple. That doesnt make them right. I can make a logical argument that supports slavery, but the real question isnt whether the argument is constructed via Logical syllogisms that are both valid and sound, but whether the stance supported by the syllogism is correct. I fail to see any empirical warrants. 2 out of your 4 arguments to support the book, using the book itself, have failed miserably as they can be applied to almost any book regardless of content. Its almost as if you want us to forget the content and concentrate on the irrelevant aspect of the book, which is interesting, since anyone can make the same argument for, say, any book. 2. This is a laughable argument to make. I shall make a point by point refutation. - Any public library offers this book, and most public libraries are free. The argument that banning the book from SCHOOL LIBRARIES is completely nullified due to the fact that any parent is still free to go to the nearest public library and sign out this book. No school is trying to ban this book from every single library in the world, nor am I advocating that. parents are still free to do so as they feel by signing this book from their nearest public library. -Even in a school containing 300 students, 280 of them have looked at pornographic material by the age of 16. This does nothing to support an argument to push erotic literature and pornographic material and content in our public schools. Therefore, id like to ask why you are making the same argument for this. I also thank my opponent for posting the RD2. Let us continue to have an interesting debate. 1). . http://www.adl.org... 2). . http://memory-alpha.org... 3). . http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com... 4). . http://democratherald.com...