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

I appreciate my opponent's response. I will attempt to follow the organization as laid out by my opponent. Pro's Responses To My Case My Contention 1: A. These topics are not all categorically banned from high schools. My opponent is attempting to treat every book the same, which is inherently untrue of the book selection process, as well as illogical. If all controversial topics were banned from high school libraries & classrooms, the list of books allowed in libraries would be short and undistinguished. Note that such seminal works as Huckleberry Finn, Of Mice & Men, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Giver, Kaffir Boy, & Brave New World would all be banned, and each is a current staple in most high school classrooms because of its controversial nature. [1] B. These topics are not inherently bad. The way in which they are handled is what is called into question. Extend my argument regarding the review of this book by myriad community representatives, all who concluded that the handling of the content was appropriate for high school readers. C. Controversial topics, for the prior knowledge that they tap into & the higher order thinking that they encourage, are an intricate part of the educational standards in any given state. Not only that, but persuasive writing skills are based upon them. D. We are talking about high school libraries. Students understand suicide at that point. Furthermore, extend my analysis which says censorship is a parent's job & right, not the school's in cases such as that of The Bunny Suicides. E. Pornography is legally prohibited by federal statute. It in no way compares to the book in question. My Contentions 2/3: A. I'm a licensed teacher in a state which has one of the most rigorous licensure processes in the nation. Of course I know what you mean by educational standards. I have to align every unit I teach directly to them. That's not an appeal to my authority, but rather a note to my opponent that he need to worry about a misunderstanding on my part. B. My opponent has not a clue what the state standards for education in any state are if he does not equate the skills mastered by open discourse & creative or unique expression to standards of education. Intelligent, higher order discourse & expression are key components of education. Because I'm in Oregon, let's sample the content standards alone for Language Arts [2]: *EL.HS.RE.23: Make reasoned assertions about an author's arguments by using elements of the text to defend and clarify interpretations. *EL.HS.RE.26: Draw conclusions about the author's purpose based on evidence in the text. *EL.HS.RE.33: Generate relevant questions about readings on issues. *EL.HS.LI.08: Identify and analyze unstated reasons for actions or beliefs based on explicitly stated information. *EL.HS.LI.10: Interpret and evaluate the impact of subtleties, contradictions, and ironies in a text. *EL.HS.LI.15: Analyze the impact the choice of literary form has on the author's message or purpose. And that's only one section of one subject for the state of Oregon. All of these standards not only require discourse & intellectual creativity, but also apply to books like The Bunny Suicides. C. The Kama Sutra is in no way related to the book in question. I ask my opponent to quit comparing this to pornographic materials or materials depicting graphic sex. My Contention 4: A. Again with the porn. Cross-apply my other arguments, please, cuz I'm tired of retyping them. B. I actually do know how "the system works," if we are talking about the educational system. Degrees in education tend to help out with this. C. My opponent mishandles this argument. My 4th argument is not about the benefits of this book in teaching suicide to students. It's about encouraging at-risk readers or reluctant readers to pick up books. Empirically, this is precisely the sort of material that will draw students to other books, thus creating a process by which students find their way to loving reading. My opponent glosses over my American Library Association evidence, so extend my arguments about this book encouraging at-risk readers to become life-long readers. My Responses To Pro's Case Pro's Contention 1: My Response 1: Simply put, your first argument just says there are times when we need to ban stuff. I agree. There are. However, just because we find it acceptable to ban some things doesn't automatically link you to Bunny Suicides. You did nothing in this argument to establish Bunny Suicides as containing ban-able content, and still haven't provided explicit text examples to prove its inappropriateness. My Response 2: A. I'm a girl. B. Not a clue what you mean by "making a synonym." I think I need to clarify: pornography is illegal to possess if you are under the age of 18, yes? Hence, it is against the law to have pornography in a building full of minors. However, it is not against the law to have a book of cognizant cartoon bunnies on the verge of ending their lives in a high school library. Pat McConnell voted to keep the book for this very reason. She was referring to banning the book as unwarranted censorship. C. The committee report detailed why we recommended keeping the book. The images are not graphic in any way. As I noted in RD 2, the depictions are pre-death. Bunnies have set up completely unrealistic situations. The surreal quality of the images, paired with the fact that an animated animal is doing them, mitigates the content, much like Art Spiegelman's portrayal of the horrors of WWII is mitigated by his use of cats, dogs, mice, & pigs in Maus I & Maus II. Never does a bunny simply shoot itself in the head, or hang itself, and never do we see a single bit of gore in the book. My Response 3: A. Yes, yes there is. If it is pornographic in nature, whether in print or in picture, federal statute limits its distribution to those over the age of 18. Bunny Suicides is not pornographic. We never put erotic literature in high school libraries in the first place because of said laws. B. Rape is still pornographic if discussed graphically. However, books dealing with rape in non-pornographic ways are included in school libraries all the time. Rape is in the encyclopedia. Should we ban those because controversial topics exist within their covers? My Response 4: It doesn't. Hence the designation of "fun fact" and the smiley. "Now, onto the pro contentions, although i have no idea what this serves to do, except to selfishly pander and promote himself." A. Still a girl. B. Ad hominems will get you nowhere, esp. if they don't make sense. Pro's Contention 2: My Response 1: A. I use specific examples from this book to prove myself true (which is to say I reference specific images included in the book, like the Nazi image, the physics image, the knife & magnet store image, the smoking image, the NASA space shuttle image, etc.). My empirical warrants are also listed in my case. I am drawing on knowledge gained during 8 collective years of education training & experience. B. Actually, I highlight the content of the book specifically. Thus far, my opponent is the only debater in this round who has yet to make a specific argument regarding the content of the book. My Response 2: A. Cross-apply my arguments on the whole porn thing. Again. B. Public vs. High School Libraries: 1. The argument is irrelevant to the debate. It does nothing to establish why we should ban a book that has no illegal, obscene, graphic, or traumatizing content, which I have already proven is true. 2. There is no public library in the towns that I teach in. Hence, access to this book is only available through a rural school's high school library. His "counterplan" won't work for students that don't have ready access to any other source of books. [1] http://www.ala.org... [2] http://www.ode.state.or...