No anonymity when trying to dictate in the public square

Re: “Should libraries protect those seeking to ban books?” Jan. 29 commentary

After reading Krista Kafer’s column on libraries, book banning, and identifying the requestor, I thought I might have to agree with her for the first time. After a second cup of coffee, I came to my senses.

If you want to go to the public square and try to change things for more people than yourself, you cannot put a bag over your head. Using Krista’s example, I see no shame in being one of the 83% ers when they suggest a book belongs in the adult section of the library and not the children’s section.

However, when they go to the public square and demand a book be banned, not only from my library, but all libraries in my city, county, state, etc., then they should be willing to be recognized, by name, at the grocery store or “Next Door” email. It’s one thing to suggest a different path than to demand the road be closed. Sorry, 83% ers, when one or more of the 17% ers want to put a bag over their head, you are collateral damage. Identity for one means identity for all. On the other hand, if you’re ashamed enough to see a need to put a bag over your head, then stay out of the public square.

The snag is, thanks to some hate- filled, overly conservative, and overly religious individuals, the public square has become a somewhat dangerous place. And no, as Kafer so often states, this is not a bothsidesof- the- isle issue. Conservatives own library and school curriculum control issues; they need to be known, by all, for their activities. — Jim Mcclung, Lakewood