Uncle Bobby under fire again
Categories: Kids 5-7, Gay Parenting, That's Entertainment, Religion & Spirituality
Colorado librarian James LaRue has gotten another challenge to Uncle Bobby's Wedding, the book about a little girl guinea pig's concerns that her uncle won't play with her after he gets married. The idea is simple enough -- Young Chloe loves her uncle but worries that after he gets married, he won't have time to play with her any more. None of that is why parents are getting up set about the book.The "problem" with the book is that it just so happens that Uncle Bobby is marrying his boyfriend Jamie. It's not really relevant to the plot, nor, as I understand it, is it gone into in detail, it's just sort of a part of the background of the story. Big deal. Apparently, to some, it is a big deal and that is cause to want the book removed from the library shelves. After the first challenge, LaRue wrote an intelligent, sensitive response that explained why, in spite of (or even perhaps because of) the reasons for the challenge, the book would remain on the shelves.
Well now a second challenge has come along, this time asking that the book be removed because gay marriage is illegal in Colorado. Once again, LaRue responds in an intelligent, polite manner -- something I'm not sure I would have been able to do. He points out that it is not specified where the story takes place, whether it is in Colorado, in Massachusetts (where the author hails from), or even "in a wholly fictitious universe with its own laws." Yeah, like one where guinea pigs talk and wear clothes and get married? Ya think?
Of course, if we were to follow that line of reasoning -- removing books that depicted illegal acts -- we'd have to get rid of the mysteries, the adventures, the newspapers and news magazines... heck, most of the library would be empty. We'd even have to pull the bible off the shelf because, last time I checked, murder and incest are still illegal most places.
Via Mombian
Recent Posts
- G.I. Joe, My Little Pony Invading TV With New Children's Network (2/09/2010)
- Movies May Influence Children's Food Choices, Study Shows (2/09/2010)
- Report Cites 220 Cases of D.C. Teachers Abusing Students (2/09/2010)
- Chicago Candidate Drops Out of Race With Tearful Child On Display (2/09/2010)
- Juicy, But Not Juice (2/09/2010)






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)
NatsMomma 8-23-2008 @ 6:23PM
I hadn't heard of this book before, but after reading this, I think I just might buy it for my daughter. If you don't want your child to read it, try some active parenting and don't let them pick it up. Or maybe just don't teach them to read. I mean, that's about as logical as not wanting to read a story because the background story is about two male guinea pigs getting married.
Reply
HumanLibber 8-24-2008 @ 4:12AM
"maybe just don't teach them to read"
Right On!
"Of course, if we were to follow that line of reasoning -- removing books that depicted illegal acts -- we'd have to get rid of the mysteries, the adventures, the newspapers and news magazines... heck, most of the library would be empty. We'd even have to pull the bible off the shelf because, last time I checked, murder and incest are still illegal most places."
Put out their eyes and punish them severely for thinking or even asking questions, too.
I surely do wish the fundamentalist Christians who spout on about how much they believe in Jesus and how strictly they follow Jesus would _believe_ that Jesus might have meant it to be _followed_ when he said that the second most important thing was that the proper way to treat people was to love them as much you love your very own self, even if that meant that sometimes you'd have to keep your mouth shut when a man expressed affection to another man, or a woman expressed affection for another woman, or a man should let his wife work or allow nude pictures of herself to be published or, heaven forbid, be in love with another man at the same time as she's married and taking care of her responsibilities as a partner to love and cherish her husband.
Remember that you must beat the devil out of children, because Jesus must have been nuts when he said that to such belong the kingdom of heaven.
Never, ever, do we want to even think about teaching children that the well-being of all people, including themselves, is more important than whether two guinea pigs get married. Like, starving and enslaved children might be more important than getting cheap plastic junk at Walmart. Like, preventing genital mutilation might be more important than preventing homosexuals from getting married. Like treating the people of other nations like human beings instead of invading their country just because they want to decide the price they will sell the oil that is pumped from the oil wells in their country. And like taking a stand that murdering women who have been raped because your family has been shamed is wrong.
For heaven's sake people, what part of "heal the sick", "feed the hungry", and "make peace" among all nations and peoples by "doing justice and loving mercy" got left out of your Bibles?!?
Winston 8-29-2008 @ 4:22PM
Hey Nat's Momma,
Does it all come down to keeping your children from material you don't want them to read without any occasion for public institutions sharing any responsibility whatsoever? Should the children's section of public libraries & bookstores not be treated differently at all from the adult's section regarding any topic which might traditionally be deemed inappropriate? Should you also not include themes regarding adultery, incest, bestiality, multiple partners, pornography & pedophilia from being exclusionary material as well?
Your argument seems to be based solely on rights for all with no place for any degree of censorship no matter what the topic. Is that the basis of your comment, or is it that you simply do not put homosexuality in the same category of deviant or inappropriate behavior as other practices which should be censored? If you do not believe in censorship, that would be an all inclusive perspective requiring legal policy consistent with it.
If parental responsibility should overshadow any government mandated accountability calling for legal public censorship, the logical conclusion would be that you would be in favor of children's reading material including incest, adultery, multiple partners, pedophilia, bestiality & pornography being available in the children’s section of libraries & book stores as well. After all, as you have said, “Just try active parenting or don’t teach them to read.”
If you don’t think that homosexuality is a deviant lifestyle but you do think most or all of these others are, just say it, & don't go into all the fluff which seems to imply that virtually any & all material should be in children’s book sections, & that parents are the only ones responsible for making sure children don't read what they don’t want them to.
Otherwise, by all means buy your daughter books portraying homosexuality as normal, but in the name of tolerance don’t leave out books on incest, bestiality, adultery, multiple partners, pedophilia & the like as normal & non-deviant lifestyles as well. The people practicing those lifestyles want acceptance too, & they are looking to you to deliver.
Winston
RICARDO SANTANA 8-23-2008 @ 8:48PM
i support LA RUE'S book ! human rights!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-SANTANA
Reply
RICARDO SANTANA 8-23-2008 @ 8:50PM
i support LA RUE'S book ! human rights!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-SANTANA
Reply
xander5503 8-23-2008 @ 6:25PM
This is ridiculous. Props to the librarian for putting up with that... Garbage. I am in complete agreement with this article.
Reply
Cameron MacLean 8-23-2008 @ 6:34PM
ennie- you need help. counseling can be had very inexpensively, even free. go through your church or synagogue or YWCA or look online.
You cannot go through life with what is going on in yours. Fix it.
And, good luck.
Reply
Joy 8-23-2008 @ 6:36PM
I’m not big on censorship of most things. If you don’t want to read something or watch something, don’t. But for those who do, they should be able to. Nobody agrees on everything so who’s going to be the judge of what’s allowed and what’s not? I feel it should be up to the individual.
Reply
Joy 8-23-2008 @ 6:50PM
If you don’t want to read it that’s fine but if I choose to, I should be allowed and so should my children. You shouldn’t be able to make that call for me. Believe what you want but don’t tell me what I should believe.
firedog5543 8-23-2008 @ 6:46PM
I have two cousins and multiple friends who are gay. I love them dearly. Why? Because they are HUMAN BEINGS. Jeez people get a grip. Homosexuality is out of the closet itself. And people SHOULD be allowed to be who they are inside and out. It is about time children are taught this, Why? It is better that it is taught to children with books and parents than by closeting them from truths they will almost certainly find out on their own. I have a small child. I teach her to not differentiate. We are ALL God's children and he loves us ALL dearly. Who are we to judge. I honestly don't think GOd will tell a gay man,"Hey, you are going to Hell my friend. Although you helped people your whole life and were basically a good person, you're gay. That ranks you right up there with child molesters, rapists, and murderer." People who talk about it being an act against nature and God, don't cast the first stone. It WILL come around and hit you in the head. Maybe it will knock some sense into you.Remember, the Bible was written by humans. I would think you would know as well as the rest of us, that Humans ALWAYS take liberty with the facts.
Reply
squareball 8-23-2008 @ 6:51PM
why do people in our society feel it is their responsibility to think for others to "protect" them from things THEY consider to be "evil" or morally wrong. if its really that bad then the next person will see it, agree, and put it back. isnt that how it should work? let everyone make up their own opinion? the thing that really gets me about these people is they seem to forget that others are intelligent enough to think for themselves and dont need these narcissistic moral crusaders to sheild their eyes. to me, the real moral offense here is a group of people trying to figure out a way to take away freedom of speech and prevent a book they dont like from being available for other people to decide upon. Down with any group that prevents the free flow of ideas in a society to advance their own agenda of "moral" dogma!
Reply
Ashley 8-23-2008 @ 6:44PM
I appluad the librarian for keeping the book on shelves. It's important for children to learn more about the world, and teaching them about gays would be a good move for a parent to make. Predjudice is predjudice, whether its for gays, blacks, jews, etc. Children should learn to be open minded for all types of people, and shouldnt learn to discriminate.
Reply
Clarence 8-23-2008 @ 7:00PM
This is not prejudice. It is called MORALS and ETHICS. You can be so open minded that your brain falls out. Apparently yours has
masonryone 8-24-2008 @ 1:52PM
I'll bet you enjoy fondling children, too. You perverts. You're all hetorphobic.
Ashley 8-24-2008 @ 2:31PM
I don't see anything wrong with gays. They're lifestyle choice is up to them, and if you don't want your children to read the book, don't check it out. It's as simple as that.
And how can I be hetrophobic-nice job on spelling by the way, if I'm straight myself?
And I'm 15 by the way, I'm probably 40 years younger than you and much more educated.
rosakara13 8-23-2008 @ 6:47PM
I love this boook and I find it very sweet. And JetChapter1 that was uncalled for. This is why our children are so confused and filled with hate. We need to teach them to love everyone. We don't have to like what they do, but we should still respect them.
Reply
JETCHARTER1 8-24-2008 @ 9:07AM
In raising children it's crucial to instill correct and proper moral values into them during them during their formative years. Shielding them from this type of lifestyle instills proper values and doesn't instill hate or discrimination. When theyr'e old enough, and wise enough (as long as you spent the time with them and set a good example) they'll figure out that a gay lifestyle is bullshit.
John Miller 8-23-2008 @ 6:54PM
Going only on what the article says, the book depicts homosexuality as a good thing. We all know that in children's books, cute, furry little animals take on personalities as if they were people, and it is through these personalities that children learn many things. What we don't want them to be learning is that this horrible life experience robbing mental depravity, which isn't really sex at all (sex being defined as those actions directly associated with procreation), but just disgusting behavior, is good, because it's not. The library doesn't carry adult smut on its shelves, so it shouldn't carry this insidious book, either.
Reply
Deb 8-23-2008 @ 8:17PM
So..you've never seen the adult romances? Authors such as Nora Roberts, Jude Deveraux and many others use smut and descriptive sex to sell their books.
It's explicit, sometimes dirty and always THERE. Even in the Young Adult section, there is explicit sex.
How about you read what you choose, and let the rest of us read what we choose?
If you don't like a book, then you don't have to own it for your personal library. But a public library caters to all, not just you.
Bottom line, if you don't like it, don't read it. But please, don't tell me what I may or may not read based on your opinions.
Uly 8-23-2008 @ 11:14PM
John, why are you thinking about sex all the time?