Deseret News | Tremonton to repeal book restriction

Reader comments
Tremonton to repeal book restriction

Mary Ann | 12:03 a.m. May 5, 2009

That's what happens when you elect adults who don't know how to read to office. What do you want to bet that those who passed this restriction had never read any of the books!

Wasn't Written "Right"? | 6:06 a.m. May 5, 2009

"But in hindsight, he does know it wasn't written right".

Does anyone at the D-News know how to write correctly?

Good mistake to catch | 6:50 a.m. May 5, 2009

I'm glad to hear that Tremonton was able to realize that the pending law may not have been what they intended.

As for the mistaken intentions - I can see how that might have happened. I, for example, always used to be stunned to walk into the Logan library and see a large sign above the movies indicating where the 'adult' section was.

Of course, for them, the adult movies were those that ranged from Pride and Prejudice to Star Trek.

Sounds like a reasonably honest mistake, and I'm glad the city council was good enough to take steps to correct any unintended side-effects.

Comments continue below

Thank Goodness | 7:22 a.m. May 5, 2009

I live in Tremonton and I can't believe our local government was about to assert control like this. I totally agree that it should be a parent's job to monitor what their child reads. The city has no business becoming "Big Brother".

uncannygunman | 7:30 a.m. May 5, 2009

It is a colossal embarrassment that this law could ever have been passed in the first place.

Duke | 7:43 a.m. May 5, 2009

re: Mary Ann/12:03 a.m. Jay 5, 2009

Your comment is another glaring example of how
mean-spirited people can be when they can hide behind the anonymity of the internet.

Congratulations to the city council for their prompt action to correct the situation.

Bill | 7:49 a.m. May 5, 2009

It is a colossal compliment to the City Council that this law was repealed before it was imposed upon the libraries.

Unanimous??? | 8:30 a.m. May 5, 2009

It's scary that such a law was passed in the first place, and even more so that it passed unanimously. Maybe this is Tremonton's bid to get on CNN's front page and pass LaVerkin to become the most embarrassing city in the state.

The heck you say! | 8:33 a.m. May 5, 2009

Promoting a bill like this is a doofism in the first place. I am glad that the city council reconsidered. What a child reads is the parents responsibility. I believe that is pretty black and white.

midwest | 8:55 a.m. May 5, 2009

I agree with Mary Ann. I would also bet none of those that passed this bill in the first place have ever read any of those books. If in fact they have, and they feel this way, all I can say is Oh my.

Dave | 9:54 a.m. May 5, 2009

"I thought (the ordinance) was kind of weird," said Councilman Lyle Holmgren. "It went against my better judgment..."
-----

The article goes on to say that Mr. Holmgren apparently still "pitched" the ordinance to the remainder of the council.

What exactly does this say about Mr. Holmgren? That he'll apparently advocate and vote for whatever someone asks him to? "Gee, this law sounds fishy to me, but, hey, it was on someones to-do list, so... ok."

Scary.

BH | 10:06 a.m. May 5, 2009

To Mary Ann and midwest:

Wow! How judgemental can one be. Are you both implying that, since Tremonton is a rural farming community, that the city council is full of ignorant "folk"? If you are, your harsh judgement is sadly wrong.

Having recently moved to the community, I have found wonderful people, who are well rounded, and at least, not as judgemental as some others.

That said, I am disappointed that the city council would have passed this, or any other law, without fully understanding it. It is good to see them swallow any pride, and admit the mistake.

Artemisia Tridentata | 10:41 a.m. May 5, 2009

This is the same town that entertained the Nation several years ago by passing an ordnance that forbid "smokers" from exhaling within several blocks of a school or church. Way to keep the interest up toward our state.

The Rock | 11:02 a.m. May 5, 2009

Reminds me of a young girl who sought to ban a dangerous chemical: DiHyrogen MonOxide.
This chemical causes asphyxiation in quantities as small as a single cup, is found in large concentrations in cancer patients, it even causes steel to loose its strength under prolonged contact.

She got many people to agree with her. Many signed a petition to ban this substance.

What is DiHyrogen MonOxide? Ordinary water, something necessary for human life.

Sometimes things that sound really good aren't.

Tooele Dad | 11:41 a.m. May 5, 2009

It looks like they passed this legislation without reading it just like the U. S.Congress did. They should be happy that kids are reading anything! Reading is becoming a lost skill with many kids.

Footloose | 12:02 p.m. May 5, 2009

Everybody go footloose.

Driftin | 1:19 p.m. May 5, 2009

This City needs a City Manager. The last one is gone and the new one is a no show. Sad! They could have caught that language before it went out and adjusted it. Where is the City Attorney? Fire that guy!

Rich | 6:03 p.m. May 5, 2009

Why not ban bad CDs and DVDs, too. Not just at the library, but at every shopping establishment. Then you can kiss your county budgets bye-bye as you'll need every last dollar to defend your actions all the way to the Supreme Court.

Stories Suitable for Teens | 9:22 a.m. May 6, 2009

"Subject and storylines are typically consistent with the age and experience of the main character. Stories are not always suitable for those under 18 years of age or sensitive individuals ... May have sexual content, or strong adult themes," the ordinance reads.

That must mean that individuals under 18 years of age are not otherwise being exposed to sexual content or strong adult themes. Or maybe it means that Young Adult literature does not deal with the reality teens are living. Yeah, right...

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.