Actually, with due consideration to what you have to say, I think our actual point of disagreement lies on a point more mundane and yet fundamental to the issue at hand. That issue being whether anyone is elected to curate library books in a school library. To my mind, that is the function of librarians and teachers -- unelected professionals-- in concert with individual parental input on a case by case basis, and not the function of any elected official. That is our fundamental point of disagreement.

Clearly that is also what has changed in recent years, since there was a time in the past when the school library curation process was purely and strictly a matter dealt with by the librarians, teachers, and the concerned parent proceeding through an orderly and well-delineated book-challenge process. No elected official was involved at any point in the nitty gritty of that process. Yes, elected school boards would have input into textbook approvals. But not matters of individual titles sitting on a shelf in a library or sitting on a shelf in a classroom as optional reading.

Though we obviously do pretty strongly disagree and do not see eye to eye at all, I actually have appreciated debating you, as this has brought into greater clarity in my own mind where the root of the conflict perhaps actually lies. The true issue of debate is about what areas of our lives--and just how deeply into the details of those areas-- is it proper for elected government officials to insert themselves and "impose values."

And that is quite a larger debate. Perhaps that will be my next composition on Medium. The topic of the tyranny of the majority. That will give me a chance to trot out some Federalist Papers. ;-)