Why would you NOT allow your dc to read Harry Potter?nt

[Amy in MD]

My dc haven't read them because there are better books to read. There are books better in terms of quality of writing, subject matter, character building, etc.

 

Amy

[PariSarah]

So this is all highly speculative.

 

But I don't think anything other than age/maturity level would be the issue for us.

 

I might caution him that we're not into anything-mania around here, so there won't be any costumes, licensed merchandise, that sort of thing. And if HP became an issue over which he was willing to pester us or break rules, HP would become an issue over which we were willing to restrict privileges.

 

But I really don't see that happening, either.

[mcconnellboys]

Well, I don't know that this was just hype. I did see this series inspire a love of reading in my older son, more so than did the Redwall series (which we also own). And I do like the Redwall books, don't get me wrong, but after a while, I have to take a break from the sheer overload of all that name calling and my son felt the same way.....

 

And I did see these books inspiring reading in a lot of other kids, much as the Goosebumps series of books swept through the rank and file of younger kids when my son was in first grade. I think either of the above mentioned series are a LOT more worthwhile, than something like Goosebumps, LOL, but I think just about anything that inspires kids to PRACTICE their reading, which is what makes for better proficiency in the long run, will fit the bill. Practice does make perfect....

 

I don't agree with the reading programs that assign points by simple length of the book. C.S. Lewis' books are virtually all pretty short, and I think they're masterpieces. Ditto for Poe. Some folks find it easier to be succinct than others. I think this makes for good role models in writing well - and I think kids should read from these authors as much or more than they read from the long-winded authors. So I do agree that schools should look to other means for assigning their points....

 

Regena

[SparrowsNest]

Probably the only reason would be that I'm an agnostic and it's a Christian apologetic meant to sneak the story of "greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends" and the whole redemption scenario into the unsuspecting minds of the general public.

 

This made me smile. Apparently, the HP books are both Christian AND Satanic! ;)

 

But seriously, this was my husband's take on it. We have read them all and have been known to have HP weekends where we watch the movies as well. We were soundly chastized by an elderly member of our church for 'subjecting our children to witchcraft.' We just smiled and said "hmmm, different strokes, I guess" and left it at that.

[Friederike in Persia]

I was about to post on HP and my first question would have been if it's well known in the US. I guess it is!:D

Apart from Karin nobody mentioned about the dc being "left out", if they don't know the characters (and she actually said she doesn't care about that). I have to admit I do care, to an extend.

We're about to go to the UK (where HP is mega big) and I'd rather they know what everybody is talking about. The dh has reservations, whereas I think the first book is rather innocent.

Do you ever let your children read books, so that they are "culturally adjusted" ?

 

Friederike

[Elaine]

I don't know?

 

My boys are just not interested in them, but if they were, I would not mind if they read them. (And we are a Christian family.)

 

It seems rather hypocritical to not let your children read HP because of witchcraft and then turn around and embrace Mary Poppins, Bedknobs and Broomsticks and Nanny McPhee.

 

 

This is one opinion. I do not have the time, nor the energy, to engage in on online debate concerning this.;)

[Sandy in Indy]

Do you ever let your children read books, so that they are "culturally adjusted" ?

 

Short answer: no. I'm not at all concerned about my kids being "culturally adjusted" to the world.

 

My older kids were old enough to make a choice when HP came out. Neither of them was interested and I was pleased, frankly. I think HP opens the door to real occultism...and that's not something I'm interested in.

 

My youngest isn't reading on his own yet, but I wouldn't allow him to read them because of my spiritual concerns.

[Dayle in Guatemala]

I read the first 3 books in the series, because I'm not the kind of person to "ban" things unless I have a really good reason why. I have to say that Rowling is a tremendous writer who put a lot of detail and thought into her books, characters, and plots. She's a gifted and talented person. I also really respect the way she pulled herself out of welfare (basically) and used her abilities to make a wonderful life for her family.

 

I don't "do" HP for these reasons:

 

1. They haven't asked so we don't go there. They love Narnia and LOTR and are into other types of stories.

 

2. I feel that as the books get progressively further along, the themes become a little more intense. I wanted to wait for that with my dc.

 

3. With authors like Lewis and Tolkien to read, they are able to get a lot of their fantasy from writers with a Christian worldview which is really important to me. I'm not saying that Rowling isn't a Christian, I don't know anything really about her, but, why push something that is similar to what they are already reading?

 

Anyway, this has been my experience FWIW.:o

[Laura K (NC)]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Friederike in Persia

Do you ever let your children read books, so that they are "culturally adjusted" ?

 

Short answer: no. I'm not at all concerned about my kids being "culturally adjusted" to the world.

 

 

You said it! A large part of my parenting lately has been trying to keep my kids sheltered from "culture." TV, pop/rap music, drugs, bad language (and OMG!), the mall, the books on the endcaps in the bookstore about sex, Facebook/MySpace, the magazine aisle in grocery stores...

[Peek a Boo]

You're right Colleen --I should clarify that the darkness is what would keep me from turning a kid loose w/ HP.

My younger kids have seen the movies [of course, they have seen allll the Star Wars movies, Alien, and lots of other stuff]. If i had a child that was very sensitive to dark themes, i wouldn't let them read HP w/o guidance.

 

I also would not let them read HP unless they already had pretty good reading and vocabulary skills.

 

But the "witchcraft" is not one of our reasons, and that a lot of other people happen to like them isn't one either.

 

I do think that if a reason given is inaccurate or could lead others into an interpretation that could be skewed, a clarification is called for.

[*anj*]

I don't understand why people show up on message boards simply for the purpose of starting controversial threads. This horse has been so badly beaten it's a pile of dust.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I don't understand why people show up on message boards simply for the purpose of starting controversial threads. This horse has been so badly beaten it's a pile of dust.

 

Some people are new. And they might be wrestling with the notion of perhaps letting a 10 y/o read the books, but they have a parent or pastor or friend who is saying, "Why would you let your child READ those books!?"

 

Or perhaps they've read them all and can't quite understand the fuss surrounding the opposition and wanted to sound it out among intelligent, independent thinkers.

 

I mean, where ELSE would you go for that on the internet? We're IT. :D

[j.griff]

I disagree that this poster is a necessarily a "troll". And I totally believe that the women and men on this board are perfectly capable of having a conversation such as this without having it end in a flame war ;)

But, I did "wonder" a bit when I saw that the OP only has 2 posts. I still think it "could" be a genuine question, from a person who hasn't experienced those types of threads before.

[*anj*]

I disagree that this poster is a necessarily a "troll". And I totally believe that the women and men on this board are perfectly capable of having a conversation such as this without having it end in a flame war ;)

But, I did "wonder" a bit when I saw that the OP only has 2 posts. I still think it "could" be a genuine question, from a person who hasn't experienced those types of threads before.

 

Yeah, I should clarify that I don't necessarily think it's a troll, I just happened to find that little emoticon and I wanted to use it. And yes, people can talk about it without fighting...it's just that I don't think too many well intentioned people join a message board and the first thing they think of to talk about is HP, you know?

Whatever.

[*anj*]

Some people are new. And they might be wrestling with the notion of perhaps letting a 10 y/o read the books, but they have a parent or pastor or friend who is saying, "Why would you let your child READ those books!?"

 

Or perhaps they've read them all and can't quite understand the fuss surrounding the opposition and wanted to sound it out among intelligent, independent thinkers.

 

I mean, where ELSE would you go for that on the internet? We're IT. :D

 

Yeah, I suppose. I guess that once you've been around the message board culture for awhile you realize that there is little new light to be shed on the following topics:

 

Santa: real or a lie?

Halloween: Satan's fun day or good ol' fashioned fun?

Christmas: who had it first? who owns the rights?

HP: how could you? vs. why wouldn't you?

 

Those are probably The Big Four, but I can probably think of others.

 

I have to say I'm in a kind of Debbie Downer mood today....

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

You mean, like Star Wars? or Spider Man? If Pirates of the Caribbean was written into a big heavy novel kids would similarly read it and overlook most mediocrities in the prose. It is the marketing that makes the book, not the quality of the book itself.

 

Popularity based the book's own virtue is won slowly and over the course of years. Ivanhoe. The Pilgrim's Progress. Pride and Prejudice (even before the movie version came out). These weren't artificially brought to the public's attention by the media. They won admirers in their own right.

 

I don't resent the content, if you're implying that I object to the magic. I've made that clear in another post in this thread. I resent the media's ability to affect the public consciousness to such an extent as to make a mediocre book into one of the Great Books, or on par with those of J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. It seems unjust. All those reluctant readers... it seems they should have been offered a great book with the same enthusiasm.

 

Well, but Star Wars, POC, and Spider Man are NOT books. (Or rather, not novels originally.) They needed a different media to present them as "wonderful."

 

As for admirers of Harry Potter, it was a few years before the books became wildly popular. When the first couple of books came out, the mainstream media was informed *about* the books that people were loving and recommending via bookshops, libraries, word of mouth. Some on this board read them before it became even remotely popular, they've said. The books weren't adopted somehow from conception to print and given the media stamp of approval to push and make popular. Somewhere in the middle, the books and the media became bedfellows and pushed the phenomenon bigger than it could have been. And all the opposition and banning certainly helped spread the word. People wanted to know what the fuss was about, and found themselves interested in how it all turned out.

 

I would offer that the mainstream media is not what it was when Sir Walter Scott was writing, or Bunyan, or Tolkien, or Lewis. And if a company could have marketed toy knights or pilgrims or hobbits or Narnians (oh, wait... heh) and thought they could have gotten rich by "pushing" the phemonenon or even manufacturing the craze in the first place, they would have done so. Press releases. Author interviews. ("Tell us, Mr. Bunyan, how is it that the Slough of Despond doesn't have prozac dispensing doctors offices along the way? Don't you think that people have enough gloomy reality in their lives? Must they be subjected to metaphor in literature?" "Well, I'll tell you Larry, when I was writing Pilgrim's Progress, I was at a low point in my Christian faith. I was doubting...")

 

Anyway, we can eschew anything that is "bandwagon." I understand that thought process. It probably keeps us out of much trouble. No Hannah Montana at our house, for example, because I would have to manufacture that craze for my 4 y/o like my niece has done for *her* 4 y/o. It isn't, for us, age-appropriate. But to reject something because other people found it good, when it is *also* good for me, just because lots of others jumped on it, too? Or to even have to protest, "Well, WE were reading it before it even beCAME popular. *sniff*" is sort of ridiculous to me.

 

The writing in HP is nowhere near as good as Lewis or Tolkien. By the time you reach the third book, you're begging for someone, anyone, to please edit this woman and send some of it back for a rewrite. But as a storyteller? She's right up there. And for a "thinky" story that's accessible to middler children, these are good vehicles to begin the process.

 

Or you could just read them in Latin. Which makes them even MORE interesting. :D

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

I have to say I'm in a kind of Debbie Downer mood today....

 

Well, STOP IT!

[*anj*]

Well, STOP IT!

That was really very funny!

I love Bob Newhart!!

[Colleen]

I do think that if a reason given is inaccurate or could lead others into an interpretation that could be skewed, a clarification is called for.

 

Can't each of us say another's interpretation is "skewed" simply because it doesn't align with our own?

[Call Me Cordelia]

Ok, THAT was FUNNY! Really, really funny!

[Call Me Cordelia]

Well, STOP IT!

 

 

Ok, just wanting to clarify that I thought THIS was funny. I'm not laughing at you, Colleen!!

[SnowWhite]

We won't "disallow" HP, but I'm going to steer in other directions as long as possible because I'm so disappointed about the Dumbledore/gay thing. It put a bad flavor in my mouth. Since it didn't come into the story, why say it? That may get me some bad rep, but that's ok. It totally spoiled my enjoyment of the final book. Prior to hearing that quote, I was seeing all kinds of parallels between my Christian faith and Harry's quests.

[Colleen]

I know plenty of people who have zero familiarity whatsoever with the "message board culture". If one of them were to join here today, maybe she would ask a question that the rest of us deem redundant. I can't get on board with immediately assuming the person is looking to cause trouble. (And btw, redmom3 also started another thread, asking how to teach a little person to roller skate. Clearly not a controversial subject ~ I hope!)

 

Also, there's no need for debate here if people to whom the question is addressed would answer and others would refrain from doing so. The phrasing of the question makes a difference, imo. We weren't asked: "Do you allow your children to read HP? Why or why not?" Those who don't allow it were asked, "Why don't you allow it?". I don't think it's helpful when people post a reply merely to say, "I have no idea why someone wouldn't allow it" or when others rush to question/correct the thinking of those who have opted out of the series.

[Storm Bay]

I know plenty of people who have zero familiarity whatsoever with the "message board culture". .

 

I agree with Colleen on her whole post, but only quoted part for space.

[OnTheBrink]

 

Also, there's no need for debate here if people to whom the question is addressed would answer and others would refrain from doing so. The phrasing of the question makes a difference, imo. We weren't asked: "Do you allow your children to read HP? Why or why not?" Those who don't allow it were asked, "Why don't you allow it?". I don't think it's helpful when people post a reply merely to say, "I have no idea why someone wouldn't allow it" or when others rush to question/correct the thinking of those who have opted out of the series.

 

I completely agree with this point.

[Old Dominion Heather]

Do you mean not read them at a given age, or not at all?

 

My guys will read them, I am sure, but they (especially the oldest) get swept up in the whole thing and like to keep going until they burn out. I don't want them to get bored with the plot line, because I think they are so good. I think I am making them wait until they are old enough to appreciate them. :D They better like them! We might have to disinherit them otherwise!:eek:

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Also, there's no need for debate here if people to whom the question is addressed would answer and others would refrain from doing so. The phrasing of the question makes a difference, imo. We weren't asked: "Do you allow your children to read HP? Why or why not?" Those who don't allow it were asked, "Why don't you allow it?".

 

 

Actually, the question was "Why would you not allow it?"

 

And I answered the reasons that if I did not, I wouldn't. Because I read the question not "Why don't you?" but "What reasons might one have for not allowing it?"

 

I honestly have no notion of what the OP thinks about the subject.

 

Oh, and I wanted to say for further clarification to the thread that our 4 y/o won't be reading the series til she's ten or eleven. Because that's the age I think is appropriate for starting the books. And it will depend, of course, on her temperament. Right now, we don't do any do any dark-ish supernatural fantasy stuff, even Disney. It's just not right for her right now.

[StaceyinLA]

in regards to HP being touted as the, "great salvation," I believe that the reason for this is that it got many kids who wouldn't normally pick up a book, reading. Whether or not it is the utmost of great literature, you have kids reading HP who would NEVER voluntarily read books like, "The Count of Monte Cristo," or other classics. HP is certainly more quality reading than much of what is out there for teens.

 

FWIW, I wasn't into my kids reading them, and most of them haven't (oldest has read the first 4). I had ZERO interest because I am not remotely interested in fiction.

 

This past summer, when the last book was coming out, I had some teens working for me that were so excited. I discussed it with them and decided to let ds start the series. I picked up the first book on my way home from buying it (dd was driving) and I was hooked. I read all 7 books in about 8 weeks. I thoroughly enjoyed them, and often couldn't wait to finish one so I could start another. I honestly had never enjoyed books that much. I think it is just the way she writes that makes you WANT to find out what is going to happen. It may not be that way for everyone, but it was for me, and I'm sure that is some of the intrigue that had the teens going mad for Harry.

 

Just my 2 cents, though it really doesn't address your issues.

[Daisy]

I'm jumping back in but not sure why. Maybe I'm feeling daring today.

 

Here is what amazes me. This is a classical board full of folks who value literature. Who feel that it is very important for their children to read "good" books. I'm assuming that you all feel this way because in some way or another we internalize what we read. It becomes part of who we are, part of how we think, part of how we believe. When a really great, thought-provoking book is discussed everyone seems to agree with this position.

 

And yet, when some of us believe this to be true in the reverse, often we hear how it is "just a book" or it's "just for entertainment".

 

I have problems with this logic. Something, whether book, movie, music, photography, either impacts us or not. We don't get to pick and choose. We can't say, I'll allow this to impact me positively but won't allow that to impact me negatively. Children have even less ability to make this choice.

 

So our family chooses to filter very heavily what we ingest into our souls, into our minds and into our bodies, because we believe that every book makes an impact. I use the exact same criteria with every book, every movie, every piece of music and every photograph. We do not pick and choose. We do not make something okay to ingest into our being simply because it is culturally significant or because it is attractive or entertaining.

 

I do not HATE HP. I simply do not find that it's contents align with the standard we have set for our family. HP is only one of many other books our family has passed on and yet this does seem to be rather the most controversial one (at least right now).

[j.griff]

Assumptions are almost never a "good thing" ;)

People here come from all walks of life, have MANY varying beliefs regarding almost every aspect of life, and

opinions on the merits of any work of literature is no different in those regards. Having any "expectations" of others will almost always set you up for disappointment. I personally think that ALL THINGS have potential as a source of "learning". I think that EVERY person is different, and the every person will learn things in different ways. Some people may very well learn and internalize negative things by reading HP and other fiction, others may have that "aha" moment while reading HP and other works of fiction. I have found Sci-Fi to actually be a source of "aha" for me, while having some doubts about my faith these books have lead me to have a deeper understanding of how things "are". HP can BE thought provoking, or it can be fodder- it all depends on the individual reader. My 13yod and I "think" about EVERYTHING we read and watch and hear- we love discussing the possible meanings of song lyrics (we listen to just about everything too, from classical to Eminem and Hard Core Metal) and what those lyrics mean to US individually. We get so much more out of watching TV and movies than other folks do. My dd likes the villains in most movies/books/shows, and my dh doesn't understand that. When we tried to talk to him about the villain Sylar from Heroes, dh said, "you got all of THAT from watching one episode?". ;) Thinkers will think, no matter the input. :D

[Donna T.]

Hm. It seems to me that there is a big difference in receiving the mark of the Beast willingly or out of ignorance vs having it involuntarily slammed into you to kill you. This "Beast" in HP did not want Harry as a follower, but Dead. It was only Love that saved Harry from this "occultic illumination" and it is Harry's survival [by Love / God-- not of Harry's own power] that ultimately defeats Voldemort [the "satanic forces" in HP].

 

 

Well, I wasn't looking for anyone to "bite." I was giving my answer to the original question. Love won't save anyone from the Beast. It's not even God's Love that saves us, it's His substitutionary death. If God's Love had been enough, He would not have been crucified. And, when deciding whether or not the books are appropriate for my children, I didn't consider Harry's will. OK, so Harry didn't will to receive the mark, but what about the children who willingly wear his scar? A few times a year, I receive a catalog in the mail that has party packages for children's parties. The HP party package includes little lightning bolt tattoos for the children to receive and wear. The catalog pictures show the children wearing them on their foreheads. I'm not saying that these children have received THE mark of the Beast, I'm just saying that, in my opinion, our children are being desensitized to the horror of such an occurrance.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I'm jumping back in but not sure why. Maybe I'm feeling daring today.

 

Here is what amazes me. This is a classical board full of folks who value literature. Who feel that it is very important for their children to read "good" books. I'm assuming that you all feel this way because in some way or another we internalize what we read. It becomes part of who we are, part of how we think, part of how we believe. When a really great, thought-provoking book is discussed everyone seems to agree with this position.

 

And yet, when some of us believe this to be true in the reverse, often we hear how it is "just a book" or it's "just for entertainment".

 

I have problems with this logic. Something, whether book, movie, music, photography, either impacts us or not. We don't get to pick and choose. We can't say, I'll allow this to impact me positively but won't allow that to impact me negatively. Children have even less ability to make this choice.

 

So our family chooses to filter very heavily what we ingest into our souls, into our minds and into our bodies, because we believe that every book makes an impact. I use the exact same criteria with every book, every movie, every piece of music and every photograph. We do not pick and choose. We do not make something okay to ingest into our being simply because it is culturally significant or because it is attractive or entertaining.

 

I do not HATE HP. I simply do not find that it's contents align with the standard we have set for our family. HP is only one of many other books our family has passed on and yet this does seem to be rather the most controversial one (at least right now).

 

I think that this is wonderful that you have standards for your family. I, too, have standards. When my children were the ages of yours, I was very particular about what went in their eyes and ears, what shaped their values and behaviors. I am very particular about what my 4 y/o sees and hears.

 

And yet -- and amazed you may be ;) -- I deliberately chose to introduce HP to my then 10 y/o. Not merely for entertainment, though I find nothing wrong with reading for entertainment. Not merely because it is attractive, though attractive is nice as well. I chose the book because it was Worthy of being chosen. By me. For my family.

 

I know why I would not allow the book. I can see both sides of the issue. But my choice to allow it (or books of little value in *my* estimation like Animorphs or Warriors) perhaps shouldn't amaze you so much, even on this board.

 

I suspect that lots of folks here are used to being surrounded by people whose choices mirror their own most of the time. Or they are surrounded by people whose choices disgust them some of the time, and they think that this board may be a haven of Excellence and Righteousness (as they see Righteousness). I've long ago decided that I'm not going to worry a whole lot about whether or not the next family isn't excellent enough or righteous enough. I'm pretty sure some look to me as the bad example in some areas, but I reserve the right to jump on whatever popular bandwagon is out there or let it pass me by. With consideration, of course, but without a whole lot of soul-searching or hand-wringing once the decision is made.

[Colleen]

Actually, the question was "Why would you not allow it?"

 

Right-o.

 

And I answered the reasons that if I did not, I wouldn't.

 

Ummm...What?

 

Because I read the question not "Why don't you?" but "What reasons might one have for not allowing it?"

 

Okay. Even with that reading, how would the answer, "I have no idea" help? I'm sorry; your post doesn't make sense to me.

[Daisy]

I was not trying to say that you all who read HP are wrong and allowing an evil influence into your home. What I was trying to say was a clear reason for why I do not allow the books. You are all, of course, free to make your own decisions. And I doubt any of you needed me to tell you that.

 

My point stands though. What we read does influence us. I don't think it is an assumption to state this. Based on many posts and many threads, I would say that most of you agree with that. This is why I do not understand who some get so upset about this topic. I choose to avoid HP. The reason should be clear that I feel it would be a negative influence on our family. Others feel differently. Some feel it will have a positive influence. Okay. But to assume it will have no influence, no impact whatsoever is misguided, IMO.

[j.griff]

Who feel that it is very important for their children to read "good" books. I'm assuming that you all feel this way because in some way or another we internalize what we read.

You said you were making an assumption, and now you are saying you don't think it is an assumption. :confused:

IMO, you were assuming that others agree with you that we "internalize what we read", and I would not "assume" that everyone else agrees with that statement. :D ;)

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Ok, how about this one?

 

"Why would you NOT eat meat?"

 

I would probably not eat meat if I were worried about its source. I would not eat it if I suddenly developed a conviction about it, for whatever reason. (Then I might list those reasons -- animal rights, animal cruelty, eating mammals, etc.) If the only meat available were full of hormones and pesticide residue, I might not eat that. If I had health issues that were helped by limiting meat, I'd forgo meat.

 

However, none of those things apply to me. Pass the steak.

 

That's how I read her question. What reasons can you see for not allowing your child to read Harry Potter? I listed my reasons. Had she asked, if you don't read Harry Potter, could you give me the reasons why not, I would not have answered. She would not have been addressing me. Though if in the thread someone had a specific question about a specific part of the book or issue that I could perhaps contribute to or clarify, I would do that. It would not be addressed to the OP at all. Unless SHE asked a specific question or asked for a specific point of clarification inside the thread. Then I might answer her new question.

[Daisy]

Wow, this is a whole different topic now. You really do not believe that what you read impacts you? Okay, I can't argue with that. I would be extremely saddened if nothing I read impacted me. To never cry at a sad ending. To never learn something. To never rail against the injustice in a book. To never feel I was a better person for having read something.

 

I didn't wish to argue the point but simply state why we do not read HP.

[Old Dominion Heather]

without a whole lot of soul-searching or hand-wringing once the decision is made.

 

This made me smile. I love you, Pam. :D

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I was not trying to say that you all who read HP are wrong and allowing an evil influence into your home. What I was trying to say was a clear reason for why I do not allow the books. You are all, of course, free to make your own decisions. And I doubt any of you needed me to tell you that.

 

My point stands though. What we read does influence us. I don't think it is an assumption to state this. Based on many posts and many threads, I would say that most of you agree with that. This is why I do not understand who some get so upset about this topic. I choose to avoid HP. The reason should be clear that I feel it would be a negative influence on our family. Others feel differently. Some feel it will have a positive influence. Okay. But to assume it will have no influence, no impact whatsoever is misguided, IMO.

 

I must have missed something. Who is upset? And who is saying that what we see or hear does not have an impact?

 

I will go read this thread through again, because I think I might have been in error answering you before. I didn't read any of the posts where people were freaking out, and I guess I missed it.

[Colleen]

Pam, I am not understanding you. Here, again, is my underlying point:

 

I don't think it's helpful when people post a reply merely to say, "I have no idea why someone wouldn't allow it" or when others rush to question/correct the thinking of those who have opted out of the series.

 

I don't know how your last two replies to me relate to that. I apologize for my apparent lack of clarity and comprehension.

[j.griff]

IF you had actually read my other post, you would see that I do indeed believe that everything I read/see/hear impacts me. I just find that there are positive merits in EVERYTHING that I read/see/hear :D

I disagree with the ASSUMPTION that EVERYONE here believes that they are internally impacted by everything they read/see/hear. I believe that everyone has differing beliefs, especially within specific religions. I can see God at work in EVERYTHING, even things that others find detestable (and no, I do not want to get into a debate about the way I think, and no, I am not saying that you want to debate that either ;) ).

[Daisy]

I don't think anyone is upset. I was making the point that this topic often does become controversial. I just wanted to reinerate that I'm not trying to say that your choices to allow HP are something I'm going to get upset about. It's your choice. This topic has become heated in the past and that is all I was referring too. I think everyone is handling this topic very maturely. I think it's a wonderful conversation.

[j.griff]

Thanks for mentioning the "upset" part, I forgot to address that in my post. I didn't see anyone getting "upset" either, I just saw people offering their opinions. :D

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Pam, I am not understanding you. Here, again, is my underlying point:

 

I don't think it's helpful when people post a reply merely to say, "I have no idea why someone wouldn't allow it" or when others rush to question/correct the thinking of those who have opted out of the series.

 

I don't know how your last two replies to me relate to that. I apologize for my apparent lack of clarity and comprehension.

 

Ok, one more try? My point was that I do allow it. Yet I answered the question. And I was telling you WHY I answered the question, and how I disagreed with you that she was asking "Why do you not allow your children to read HP?" Semantics maybe, but I felt she was asking "Why WOULD you not?"

 

I agree with you that people shouldn't rush in to question/correct the thinking of those who have opted out of the series, or Halloween, or creationism, or Christianity. And believe me, lots of people love to to try to correct my thinking on the latter! (Though I personally don't mind it if people question or clarify.)

 

Again -- you thought people shouldn't answer "Why don't you allow HP?" I replied to you, "I did not read it that she didn't ask 'Why don't you allow HP?' and that is why I DID reply. I was not correcting or questioning."

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I don't think anyone is upset. I was making the point that this topic often does become controversial. I just wanted to reinerate that I'm not trying to say that your choices to allow HP are something I'm going to get upset about. It's your choice. This topic has become heated in the past and that is all I was referring too. I think everyone is handling this topic very maturely. I think it's a wonderful conversation.

 

Oh. (And I assume you are answering me, right?)

 

I thought you were saying that people were getting upset and you couldn't understand that. But you're saying that you're not going to be upset about it.

 

Got it! :)

[Colleen]

Yes, semantics. And after all that, I feel you drifted past the essence of my message. Oh, well. Life does go on.;)

[Colleen]

I don't think anyone is upset.

 

I never said anyone was upset. You posted below me, Daisy (in "hybrid format", which imo is the easiest way to follow the natural flow of the conversation), but I think this must be a reply to something Pam said...?

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Yes, semantics. And after all that, I feel you drifted past the essence of my message. Oh, well. Life does go on.;)

 

Well... I feel you drifted way past the essence of mine, which was mostly conversational. It's all good, my friend. :cool:

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

I never said anyone was upset. You posted below me, Daisy (in "hybrid format", which imo is the easiest way to follow the natural flow of the conversation), but I think this must be a reply to something Pam said...?

 

Yes, it's a reply to me.

 

Daisy, the easiest way to manage to these kinds of long threads is, I've found, to push the "quote" button on the post you want to reply to and then leave a bit of text between the "[ Quote]" braces on either end. I've found the replies you've left to me, but they've been scattered around a bit.

[Daisy]

Wow! I'm so confused. Are we supposed to reply at different spots in the same thread? I've just been hitting reply at the bottom?

 

Okay, so I need to include quotes from the folks I want to reply to??

 

My first reply today was in reponse to that actual forum question. LOL. What a mess.