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

[redmom3]

nt

[Daisy]

We don't read books about witchcraft. That's the short answer.

[GreenKitty]

I have no idea?

[j.griff]

Hypothetically speaking (my Littles aren't reading yet), I would postpone it until they are at an appropriate "age" or rather, an appropriate "maturity" level to understand some of the things that happen in the books. They were written for an "older" child audience, so I didn't want my oldest to read the books when she was 6 ;)
IF my child was particularly sensitive to that type of fantasy (ie, if they have nightmares or other "issues" after being exposed to such ideas), then I would not want them to read them- BUT I wouldn't prohibit them from reading them, KWIM?

[kdeno]

We don't read books about witchcraft. That's the short answer.


That is a WHOLE can o worms :)

[Laura K (NC)]

My biggest reason is that I hate the way they've been promoted as the great salvation of American literacy while other better novels go ignored. I hate the way that kids in public schools get more credit for reading a Harry Potter book, so that's the book that all of them seem to have to read in order to compete academically in middle school. There's something fishy about that.

Also, I didn't think they were written particularly well. My kids read the first one out of curiosity, but only because my mom bought it for them (against my better judgment). None of them seemed particularly interested in reading any more of them. They could get them from the library if they wanted to, but I wouldn't put any money into the Harry phenomenon.

As far as witches go, I couldn't keep them from Harry on that point than I could keep them from Bedknob and Broomstick (which is much worse on that score than the first Harry), Roald Dahl (which they loved), Wizard of Oz, and other fictional kids books that use magic. My beef with Harry, though I'm a Christian, is not on the score of magic. Discernment is needed in that, but a Christian child in a Christian home isn't in much danger on account of that particular author.

Then there were the media reports that Dumbledore turned out to be gay post-publication. I'll be darned if that didn't nail the coffin closed for me. The media is much more spiritually dangerous than Harry Potter.

That's my curmudgeonly answer. :)

[gardenschooler]

I felt mine were too young when the first book came out (can't remember - but the first 2 dds were born in '92 & '94. We waited a few years before reading them.

Other people don't want their children to read about magic and witchcraft, as that is not acceptable to them.

[GothicGyrl]

While I agree that HP might not be on literary level with the "classic" authors that some cherish, it still has literary function that is higher than some of the trash out there and for that reason alone, it is good enough to keep it on the "kids will read it" list. I don't feel there is any conspiracy out there with these books and getting kids to read, I just think Rowling hit upon a formula long forgotten and that formula struck gold with her and the kids.

Kids are tired of reading the same old boring stuff. They are tired of reading fluff and watered down fiction. They want meat and bones, something to keep them entertained and occupied and IMHO, though I do enjoy the classics very much, they are not sufficient for today's audience.

Since this is a work of fiction, I cannot agree with the whole "witchcraft" thing and "impressionable minds" bit I hear all the time. It makes me wonder how many of those have actually read the books before they jumped on the bandwagon.

And the whole Dumbledore is gay bit? Reading the books would have caused you to find out that this does NOT play into ANY part of the storyline one bit. In fact, Rowling said that she would have told us sooner if she knew it would have made us happy, but since she didn't write the stories based on anyone's love life, it never figures in to any part of any of the books. It's not even a footnote. It just doesn't exist in the books at all.

But that's ok, really. I won't begrudge anyone choosing to not read them--it means more for sale for me when they come available. :)

[ncmomo3]

I honestly don't understand the witchcraft argument. Snow White has a witch that casts a spell. Little Mermaid has the same. This is not meant to be a confrontational statement. I just don't know what the difference would be. I can see how the tone may be too dark for sensitive children. Mine have not read it for that reason--just personal choice.

[Old Dominion Heather]

They will certainly read them if they want to when they are older. My oldest doesn't handle character death well yet. He still needs to wait a few years.

[abbeyej]

Um, because *I* was busy reading them? ;) (Okay, now that all the books have been published, that's not going to be a problem any more...)

[GothicGyrl]

I honestly don't understand the witchcraft argument. Snow White has a witch that casts a spell. Little Mermaid has the same. This is not meant to be a confrontational statement. I just don't know what the difference would be. I can see how the tone may be too dark for sensitive children. Mine have not read it for that reason--just personal choice.
I was told that the difference was that HP were "real" kids, in "real" time, in a "real" place, and since the bible says witchcraft is real, then this is a bad thing.

The "witchcraft" in say Tolkien's novels (because Tolkein was a Christian) don't count because "you can tell the difference between the good and bad and the bad suffer" but in HP "the lines are blurred between the good and bad".

That's how I was told it. It still makes no sense, but that's how they justified it. However, you will find that some don't even do Disney for various other reasons, so you can't use Snow White or Little Mermaid as your examples because they might come back with "we don't do Disney either".

That's just how I was told. Many times.

[j.griff]

Well, my understanding is that there is a difference between the type of withcraft portrayed in Snow White- that witch is an "evil" witch, while the witches and witchcraft practiced in HP is not "evil", though there are "some" evil characters. Does that make sense? I think it is the thought of any witchcraft being portrayed in a positive light, as a good thing, as an acceptable thing- which bothers some (I'm not saying THAT is WHAT bothers everyone that disallow the HP books, just *some*)

[mcconnellboys]

I don't know, at first I thought that they weren't on the same sort of level as someone like Tolkien, but as she got more into the series, I began so recognize a lot more in the way of symbolism within the works. And the last one pulled everything together so beautifully for me that I was won over to classifying her up there with the big guys....

Regena

[Tutor]

Actually, I am encouraging my 9yodd to read them because I think she would enjoy them, but I am not sure how my 11yodd would handle some of the scenes in the later books (she scares easily), so I am not encouraging or discouraging her. I know a few people who have not allowed their children to read them because they feel their children aren't ready to handle them yet.

[Daisy]

I've read two of the books to see what all the hubbub was about. We don't read other books with witchcraft either. We don't even see it as a "protecting" our "children's" minds thing. We think the whole "I will set no evil thing before mine eye," should be taken literally and is applicable to any age group, any book, any movie, anything and everything. We believe in self-censorship and do not feel it is necessary to read a book that so blantantly goes against our personal beliefs. Okay, that was the slightly longer answer.

I readily acknowledge that people have varying degrees of conviction in this regard and am not by any means passing judgement upon those who would choose a different approach to the books. I'll add that my MIL (pastor's wife) loves them and sees no problem with them.

[strider]

I was told that the difference was that HP were "real" kids, in "real" time, in a "real" place, and since the bible says witchcraft is real, then this is a bad thing.

The "witchcraft" in say Tolkien's novels (because Tolkein was a Christian) don't count because "you can tell the difference between the good and bad and the bad suffer" but in HP "the lines are blurred between the good and bad".

That's how I was told it. It still makes no sense, but that's how they justified it. However, you will find that some don't even do Disney for various other reasons, so you can't use Snow White or Little Mermaid as your examples because they might come back with "we don't do Disney either".

That's just how I was told. Many times.

I am not arguing with you Toni.

I also want to be clear that I totally respect others' rights to hold a different opinion than I do on this one.

Having given those disclaimers, I will say this:

The "witchcraft" practiced in HP in NO WAY resembles anything the Bible warns against. When the Bible discusses witchcraft, it is specifically prohibiting believers from accessing a spiritual power (demons or the dead) other than God.

I am a devout, Bible-thumping kind of believer, but I think HP can be read and enjoyed and recognized as NOT promoting the behavior that is specifically warned against biblically.

[strider]

I was told that the difference was that HP were "real" kids, in "real" time, in a "real" place, and since the bible says witchcraft is real, then this is a bad thing.

The "witchcraft" in say Tolkien's novels (because Tolkein was a Christian) don't count because "you can tell the difference between the good and bad and the bad suffer" but in HP "the lines are blurred between the good and bad".

That's how I was told it. It still makes no sense, but that's how they justified it. However, you will find that some don't even do Disney for various other reasons, so you can't use Snow White or Little Mermaid as your examples because they might come back with "we don't do Disney either".

That's just how I was told. Many times.

Again Toni--I am not disagreeing with you, just continuing the discussion.

I read all seven books avidly and repetitively and did not find blurry lines between good and bad at all. There were characters who struggled in very human ways with very difficult choices, but the moral choice is always presented very clearly, in my opinion.

[GothicGyrl]

The "witchcraft" practiced in HP in NO WAY resembles anything the Bible warns against. When the Bible discusses witchcraft, it is specifically prohibiting believers from accessing a spiritual power (demons or the dead) other than God.

I am a devout, Bible-thumping kind of believer, but I think HP can be read and enjoyed and recognized as NOT promoting the behavior that is specifically warned against biblically.

Then you and I, believe it or not, are in COMPLETE AGREEANCE! ;) Even with all the bible side of it, you and I do happen to totally agree on this one and for that reason, the one you state, is why I can't understand why some won't read HP.

Buuuut. this thread isn't about that. She asked why you don't and some stated why they don't and some stated why they did ;)...

I read all seven books avidly and repetitively and did not find blurry lines between good and bad at all. There were characters who struggled in very human ways with very difficult choices, but the moral choice is always presented very clearly, in my opinion.


And again, you and I are in complete agreeance here. I was only stating the "why" as I was told it, not that I believed it. Trust me, I don't.

[strider]

I have not allowed my oldest dd to read HP specifically because she has a very, very vivid imagination. I would like her to get a little older and more mature before she reads these, especially because the intensity deepens so much in the later books of the series. I will gladly allow her to read the books later, though, and will greatly enjoy discussing them with her.

[Josie]

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.

[Crissy]

My biggest reason is that I hate the way they've been promoted as the great salvation of American literacy while other better novels go ignored. I hate the way that kids in public schools get more credit for reading a Harry Potter book, so that's the book that all of them seem to have to read in order to compete academically in middle school. There's something fishy about that.


Hi Laura,
I wonder if you would mind expanding on this thought. I do know the HP books are heavily promoted for financial reasons, but I've not seen them touted at the 'great salvation'. Are there specific schools/bookstores/libraries which are doing this?

And what do you mean by 'credit for reading HP'?
My son attends a junior high for two classes each day. His school (and our entire district) has a reading program for which they accumulate points, but it is books like The Count of Monte Cristo and such that garner the big points. I wonder if our district is unique in that way. Do you happen to have sources which bear this idea? I'd love to share them with his librarian if you do (she heads the reading program).

[Karin]

They came out before my dc were old enough. We waited for all fantasy, even fairy tales, until later. This had a lot to do with our dc and their sensitivities. While I don't think any magic is Biblically correct, I don't think I need to shield my children forever. But they don't even want to read it now.

I'm leery of anything so highly touted in the media, not just Harry Potter. Anything highly praised in the media undergoes intense scrutiny and thought before we use it here because I have a natural tendency to avoid the crowd's opinion. That's not to say I never accept it. Of course, I tend to question everything anyway. As my children get older they have more and more say in what they read, and they have certainly read books I think are trash literature, but not as a steady reading diet.

As for Harry Potter, if any of my kids decided to read it, I'll read it, too, so we can discuss it. But I have no desire to read it--it just doesn't appeal to me.

[Kelli in TN]

We avoided them for our younger children. In fact, when my now 17 year old was in fourth grade she attended school for a semester (we still refer to it as that unfortunate public school experiment) and I did not allow her to go to story time during the Potter frenzy, as that is what the librarian was reading.

But she read one or two of them when she was 6th/7th grade or so. By this time her literary appetite was a little more finely tuned and she was not impressed with them.

I checked the first couple out from the library about 6 months ago and showed them to my 12 year old. He never got interested in them.

So, we hold off on them because I don't think they are appropriate for our children when they are young. By the time our children have reached the age that I think it would be okay, they have no interest in the books.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

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. (""Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus" -- Never disturb the sleeping dragon. The sleeping dragon idea was C.S. Lewis's, IIRC.)

But I don't forbid other religious books, so I let the story sneak on in. We do discuss and dissect the books, however. But coming from an agnostic who used R&S Grammar for three years, I don't suppose this is a big shock.

:D

[momo4]

>>>"I honestly don't understand the witchcraft argument. Snow White has a witch that casts a spell. Little Mermaid has the same. This is not meant to be a confrontational statement. I just don't know what the difference would be. I can see how the tone may be too dark for sensitive children."

Most likely families who use that argument don't read or watch those stories either. We don't.

The world is dark enough and to me witchcraft is "dark", I prefer to expose my children to the light when they are young. It also seems these books get darker as you move along in the series? Am I wrong? There are plenty of real life dark moments in books without all the fantasy and occult.

It is during the Rhetoric Stage that teens begin to develop their world view. Self-expression is at its peak. This is not the time to let one’s child go, but to continue helping him flower, guiding him gently. Challenge his thinking skills during this stage and make him defend his intellectual and religious positions. This would be a time when I would think Harry Potter for our family would be worth reading together.

I have read a review (not all neg, but mostly) of Harry Potter by an older Christian high school child that I felt was right on. I think as children get older it is good for them to read things that go against what they have been brought up with to help them make their own decisions on such topics.

[Ellie]

if they were still young and at home.

It isn't that they are full of witchcraft, which, really, they are not. *Real* witches don't do the kinds of things that Harry Potter and his world do.

It's that especially in the early books, there are no good role models; no one is honest or trustworthy; adults are almost always enemies (the ones who aren't are not protrayed as very smart, KWIM?).

The books have some very clever writing; I love the way the people in portraits move around from frame to frame :-) for example. But I preferred to have my children read books that illustrate the kinds of values that I thought were important, or at least were purely enjoyable.

[Hillary in KS]

Our dc may read the books when they are in 7th grade, if they choose. (They may not be interested. Oldest ds wasn't.)

I worked in a bookstore when the first books came out. I had a real problem with people who bought the books (especially those 4 and after) to read aloud to their preschoolers.

I've read the entire series, and dh and I decided that allowing the boys to read them in junior high was a more appropriate age.

[Tracey in TX]

We've encouraged our kiddos to read HP. However, my cousin is opposed b/c they feel Harry represents a defiant child. He ends up on the winning side of the issue, but is repeatedly oppositional to his authority figures. It's an interesting argument.

[Eliana]

Our children are very sheltered and the level of violence/spooky stuff is higher than we like and there isn't enough literary value to it to be work putting those images into their heads. (And, no, we aren't just picking on HP! There are a lot of modern fantasy novels which are excluded for similar reasons... )

We are very selective about what our children read. Either my husband or I prereads every book our children encounter, and we gauge each child's readiness individually for when s/he is ready for a book with violence, major romance focus, scary stuff, or a lot of someone else's religion. (We have 6 children and they all devour books very quickly and enthusiastically, so this is a big job!)


Eliana

[angela in ohio]

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.

Exactly.

[lovemyboys]

I wonder if you would mind expanding on this thought. I do know the HP books are heavily promoted for financial reasons, but I've not seen them touted at the 'great salvation'. Are there specific schools/bookstores/libraries which are doing this?


I'm not Laura (but I play her on tv, ha, ha!).
Anyway, I went to a seminar series of children's literature in a major city about 10 years ago when the HP phenomenon was just starting, Phil/Sor. Stone was out and the 2nd one was just published or was coming shortly. This seminar series was well attended by school teachers, librarians, etc., and they were thrilled the month that HP was part of the topic. I had never heard the name Harry Potter til that night. They were discussing the huge interest in reading that HP created, and very seriously calling it a great salvation.

My dc were way too young at that time but I read the books with interest. I was then and still am impressed with the author's ability to create her own world.

I have no idea how that groundswell from within the schools and libraries manifested itself in the form of reading programs and point systems, but judging from those early days, nothing would surprise me. Those folks were very devoted to JKRowling and the impact she made from the earliest days.

[Crissy]

I'm not Laura (but I play her on tv, ha, ha!).
.

LOL!
They were discussing the huge interest in reading that HP created, and very seriously calling it a great salvation.


Did you get the feeling that these teachers and librarians would be promoting HP to the exclusion of good/great literature?

I suppose I'm on the side of making room for a bit of everything. My 13yo loves HP, and has read the series a number of times. But he's also read Fahrenheit 451, David Copperfield, Watership Down, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, To Kill a Mockingbird...
In other words, I see no reason a young person can't find time for a variety of books if they fit within his family's guidelines.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I read them. I thought they were ok but not something to write home about. I disliked the bratty kids, and the attitudes towards adults. I haven't banned them but I haven't promoted them either. There are plenty of really exceptional fantasy books out there. C.S. Lewis and Tolkien are just two - I also like the Redwall series, and I know there are more. I've just drawn a blank though!

[dangermom]

I haven't let my own kid read them yet because I think she's too young. The first couple of books are fine, but they get very dark as the series progresses. That worked well for the kids who 'grew up' with HP, but I don't want to let my 7yo read them all at once, which is what she would want to do.

As a librarian, I'm happy that HP encouraged kids to read and broke the big-book-phobia that so many kids had--it used to be far more common to have kids whining at you: "250 pages? That's so looooong, I need something short!" HP was a great excuse to give kids other (better!) books to read. It brought older fantasy classics back into print, which was nice. OTOH it also ushered in a flood of third-rate children's and YA fantasy and made it common for every. single. title. to get turned into a movie. That worked pretty well for Narnia, but badly for most others. And I didn't care for the hype and hysteria. (I did find it bizarre and entertaining to watch HP get vilified by certain groups while Philip Pullman's "His Dark Materials" trilogy flew completely under the radar--right up until the film release.)

I'm not a huge HP fan myself; they're OK. There's better out there, and there's worse.

[Donna T.]

We won't allow our children to read the Harry Potter books because we believe they are helping to prepare a generation of children to receive the prophesied mark of the Beast. Harry's scar is a symbol of his occult illumination. In the occult, it is widely stated that Luciferic illumination is accompanied by an electrical force that causes the body to vibrate. Jesus said, "...I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven." (Luke 10:18). The lightning bolt on Harry's forehead is a representation of his occultic baptism - the entering in of a satanic force. If you believe the Bible and read it literally, you know that at some time in history there will be a world-wide Luciferic baptism... that time when all in the world who deny Jesus will take the mark in (the Textus Receptus says on) their forehead or right-hand. If you don't believe the Bible or you don't read it literally, this is hog-wash to you. Do I think that reading Harry Potter will surely cause a child to deny Jesus Christ and receive a mark? No, I don't think it will. But, I think that the books are a part of a larger deception that will cause many to not see the plain truth that is right before their very eyes when that day comes. That's just our opinions about it.

[strider]

if they were still young and at home.

It isn't that they are full of witchcraft, which, really, they are not. *Real* witches don't do the kinds of things that Harry Potter and his world do.

It's that especially in the early books, there are no good role models; no one is honest or trustworthy; adults are almost always enemies (the ones who aren't are not protrayed as very smart, KWIM?).

The books have some very clever writing; I love the way the people in portraits move around from frame to frame :-) for example. But I preferred to have my children read books that illustrate the kinds of values that I thought were important, or at least were purely enjoyable.

What about Dumbledore? McGonagall? Hagrid? There seemed to me to be a lot of adults very much on Harry's side who were honest and trustworthy.

Not trying to be argumentative or snarky in any way--I am genuinely curious.

[strider]

What about Dumbledore? McGonagall? Hagrid? There seemed to me to be a lot of adults very much on Harry's side who were honest and trustworthy.

Not trying to be argumentative or snarky in any way--I am genuinely curious.

Also the Weasley parents???

Again--not trying to be argumentative, just curious about your perspective.

[Amy in Orlando]

My older boys are "just" the right ages for Harry Potter. My oldest read the frist book when he was 10, nearly 11. For us, it's been a LOT of fun. We've read the books together aloud, the boys have read them on their own (because I read aloud slowly) and we've enjoyed the audio versions to death. I feel lucky to have experienced the entire series with my sons. I cannot describe how much fun we have all had experiencing the series together.

When we started the series, we had no idea what it was about. I read the book and thought it was fun and no flags went up on my own radar. As my sons got older, I continued to pre-read and still found nothing to object to from a moral or religious standpoint. If one book (or a series of books) can undo my faith or my child's faith, then we didn't have much faith to begin with.


The kids and I agree that HP is probably NOT great literature, but it opened the doors for two of my sons as far as approaching large works. If that is what it takes to ease them into larger, more complex literature, I'm all for it. Plus for me, it was all just fun. I love the HP series and I'm sorry it's over. I'll continue to read the "classics" But, I love a fun read, even better a fun series, and Harry Potter will probably be tops on my list for a long time.

[Ellie]

What about Dumbledore? McGonagall? Hagrid? There seemed to me to be a lot of adults very much on Harry's side who were honest and trustworthy.

Not trying to be argumentative or snarky in any way--I am genuinely curious.

But Harry and his friends didn't really trust them (except for Hagrid, whow often came off as a bafoon....bufoon???), did he? Not for a long time. Their relationship was adversarial, at least on his part. Harry and his friends lied to them (as well as to each other).

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

But Harry and his friends didn't really trust them (except for Hagrid, whow often came off as a bafoon....bufoon???), did he? Not for a long time. Their relationship was adversarial, at least on his part. Harry and his friends lied to them (as well as to each other).

I imagine it's hard to completely trust adults when your only family despises your very existence for the past ten years. :)

Hagrid isn't very bright, it's true. And his childhood wasn't all that great either. But even with those flaws, he's got a kind, loyal heart and a generous spirit.

[Laura K (NC)]

Her kids used to go to public school, and she just started homeschooling last year. The students in her son's class would get points for reading books, and the more pages a book had, the more points it got. The biggest books are Harry books, so the kids read the books and reap the reward. I've heard of this system in our own county schools too. In order to read competitively, which is encouraged, the kids have to get as much points as possible. That encourages the Harry books. Her son was 10 at the time. Now, there's a whole other problem with reading "competitively" based on the size of the book, as if size marks a book's worth. IMO a bigger book in a younger child's hand trains the child to read quickly and less accurately, leading to more complex literacy issues, but I digress because I have a bee in my bonnet about the whole thing.

The Redwall books are big too, but they're complex. And they're marketed a completely different way. And they're just... better. :p

I came to the impression that Harry Potter was the great cure for literacy by going to bookstores and libraries, by reading literature guides written for public school teachers, and by reading the newspapers when Harry Potter first came out. I could probably dig up some pertinent articles, but it wouldn't do much good if you didn't agree with me, because anyone can find some fool somewhere to corroborate her claim, including me.

I admit that the stink has died down somewhat about the Harry Potter books in the past year or so, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. I first heard of Harry Potter only a few years after I first fell hook, line, and sinker for the WTM method. I don't think they're incompatible, but SWB did give me a sense of the importance of good literature and put an idea in my head of the primacy of the classics over more "recreational" reading. When I didn't find the Harry books even "recreational" I really resented what I was hearing in the news and in the bookstores and libraries (and even in this thread), that these books, like no others, had turned reluctant readers or even non-readers into bibliophiles.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

When I didn't find the Harry books even "recreational" I really resented what I was hearing in the news and in the bookstores and libraries (and even in this thread), that these books, like no others, had turned reluctant readers or even non-readers into bibliophiles.


Can you think of a similar phenomenon? I'm trying to, but I don't remember one.

I'm wondering why you resent hearing it? I mean, unless it's not true. Is it the content, mostly, that you resent that the kids (and adults) were reading?

[Laura K (NC)]

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 thead. 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. Tolkein 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.

[Peek a Boo]

We won't allow our children to read the Harry Potter books because we believe they are helping to prepare a generation of children to receive the prophesied mark of the Beast. Harry's scar is a symbol of his occult illumination.... The lightning bolt on Harry's forehead is a representation of his occultic baptism - the entering in of a satanic force.

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 that ultimately defeats Voldemort [the "satanic forces" in HP].

i do think the symbolism about the Deatheater's willing symbol on THEIR hands makes great fodder for discussion. But i haven't read the last couple books yet so i can't attest to exactly how she wraps that up :-)

My biggest problem w/ the books is their darkness. My favorite parts are the comic relief and that they are NOT typical fantasy. I am sooo not a fantasy kinda gal, lol. ...and Pam: don't forget that the story of redemption has been around a looong time and doesn't necessarily depend on Christ to fulfill the plot line. but you knew that, I think. Or i think i remember you mentioning that. I could be wrong :eek: I do agree that THIS author has Christian biases tho.


momo4 --I regret to say that I have come across MORE families that have "witchcraft issues" unless it's witchcraft in CS Lewis or Narnia. Then it is "ok". I can respect a consistent position, but if you [general you,lol] aren't going to make your decision on the witchcraft issue, i wish they'd just say so!


stuff that has come up repeatedly in discussions:
Scriptural witchcraft represents [B]a choice against God. Miracles/magic seem to be fine as long as it is absolutely From God. The problem and warning repeated in scripture is with the choice to turn away from God. In the HP books, there is no choice: you are either born a witch or a wizard or you aren't. You can not call upon any power except whatever skills you were born with, and even those are limited. That's like saying a strong man is calling upon "occultic forces" when he uses the strength he has trained his body to have. The books simply don't recognize any higher authority at all. I'd say the absence of God is the most noticeable and distressing part for me --except that this absence confirms there is no choice against God. But again, i haven't read the last two yet --I hear there's scripture somewhere.... on a gravestone? Is it referenced in the book as scripture?

My guys have loved the HP books. I have liked them so far, tho Goblet of Fire was rather tedious. I think these are the first fiction books my dh ever bothered reading on his own. he hates to read. So i have to side w/ pam on wondering when we've had a phenomenon where kids that didn't normally like to read were picking up a book enmasse. but I'm only 33, so I don't have too much experience witnessing that ;) i wouldn't think a movie is teh same thing though. There are plenty of books about Star Wars and they just don't get the same reading. i do agree that media attention is very often in play, but I disagree that some of those 'great' books weren't also sensationalized. They had a pretty strong media back then. Little Women was specifically written to be marketed. Frankenstein was the result of a contest. I might look it up a bit more just to see tho.

I certainly don't think they are BADLY written. Good vocabulary for the age it's geared to, clear sentences, predictable plot. Fun reading. Better than Moby Dick!!!

For Christians who are planning on utilizing HP as a discussion tool, I would recommend the book "What's a Christian to Do With Harry Potter?" She makes a case that beautifully defends Daisy's POV, offers explanation for those of us who do read them, addresses Ellie's concerns, and even touches on a few other things i hadn't noticed:

why do we not get in an uproar over A Christmas Carol??

salvation by works, visiting and discoursing w/ dead spirits, astral projection, etc. I knew there was a reason I never liked that book, lol. Dickens just ain't my cuppa.

Happy Reading to all...whatever it is you're reading!

[dangermom]

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. Tolkein 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, sure. But the fact is that they weren't and they never will be. That kind of hype will never surround a true work of great literature. The mania around Tolkien's Middle-Earth is the closest you will ever get. The media is about making money, not encouraging deep thought or true enjoyment of a good book. Those things are not lucrative enough for the media to get excited about.

Librarians liked HP because it did at least get kids excited about reading a book instead of playing a video game (though there were plenty of kids who waited for the movie). That effect could be used to introduce kids to other good books--thus the booklists titled "If you liked Harry Potter, you might like...." Kids were actually voluntarily picking up a book and reading it for fun, not because they had to read a 300-page biography and do a report on it (awwwww). (Librarians are all about the enjoyment part of reading.) Now IMO it's ridiculous to make HP a part of any school curriculum, but teachers are always trying to find hooks to make school more "fun" and yet compulsory and measureable and all sorts of un-fun things.

Librarians are constantly trying to improve the world with no money and no street cred. If something like HP comes along and looks like it will help, we'll take it. It's a gateway book; we offer the harder stuff once they're hooked. ...So, have you tried Diana Wynne Jones?;)

[Eliana]

LOL!
I suppose I'm on the side of making room for a bit of everything. My 13yo loves HP, and has read the series a number of times. But he's also read Fahrenheit 451, David Copperfield, Watership Down, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, To Kill a Mockingbird...
In other words, I see no reason a young person can't find time for a variety of books if they fit within his family's guidelines.

I agree with this completely!! We try to balance our kids' book 'diet', but we don't outlaw 'junk food' completely... but we do choose even the 'junk' we make available carefully.

Other than my 2 daughters doing high school work, I don't ever assign reading - I make books available or offer them to a child. We take a Montessori-like approach on this issue: control the environment not the child, and make sure there are thousands of worthwhile books in our home, and out from the library, and we sprinkle in some not-quite-as-worthy and a few imnsho worthless (but harmless) books... and the kids make their own choices from there.

Having some variety of quality available, and frankly discussing our book selection guidelines with the kids, seems to be preparing them well to be selective themselves, to 'feel' the difference between Jane Eyre and a recent fantasy novel, between E Nesbit or RL Stevenson and a less worthy children's novel (I'm not naming things I view as lesser b/c I don't want to debate them! And we each have our own sets of standards.)

...I do believe that if most of what we give our children is... oh, cut down to their size, that they will not so easily attain the skills or the desire to stretch in their reading.. unless it is assigned to them.

Sorry, Crissy! I got carried away there... but, as you can see, I do agree with you, and think you're making a very important point.

Eliana

[Colleen]

I think with this new board format, it's easier to "stick to the topic" at hand (although I still may go off on a bunny trails, myself!:)). Here, the simple question was asked, "Why would you NOT allow your children to read Harry Potter". No sooner does someone answer that question, than counterpoints are raised by others. On the one hand, that can make for interesting dialogue. On the other, I feel people should be given room to answer a clear-cut question without immediately being called to defend that position.

Just an observation. Oh, and speaking of the clear-cut question;), I've preferred that my boys not read HP and until just recently, it was a non-issue as they had zero interest in the books (or the rest of the HP phenom). My oldest (12.5) said a couple of months ago that he wanted to check out the first one. I felt he's old enough and said fine. He read it quickly, enjoyed it well enough, and moved on to the second. Read that one with a bit less enthusiasm. Started the third, observed it was much darker and slower than the first two, and suggested the author should have stopped while she was ahead.;)

[lynn]

I use to have an issue with it because I was I should. However, my opinions on the series have changed over the years and I no longer have issued with it. My children enjoyed the series and the movies and did not turn to the dark side not did they have any interest in trying witchcraft or anything having to do with cults it was just another series of stories they looked forward to reading.

[Plaid Dad]

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

Our dd has read the first three, but we want her to wait until she is older before reading the rest. The atmosphere and subject matter of the books gets increasingly dark and intense, and we do not think she is ready for that. When she is older, we will have no problem with her reading them.

I'm sure other posters will explain why some families do not allow their children to read the books at all.

[Laura R (FL)]

ooohhh, my first post!

I guess I'm on both sides. When HP first came out, I forbade my children to read the books or see the movie. I had all the common reasons: witchcraft, rebellion, etc. Mostly I didn't want the family involved in something so controversial. When my oldest was 10 and in youth orchestra, her group was playing the HP theme in a concert. The music was lovely and all the kids were excited...except for my dd who was clueless. It was then that I decided to watch the first movie. We loved it!! We ended up watching the second and third movies and then going through all the books via audio.

We are huge HP fans, went to see HP5 on opening night and went to our one and only midnight book party for the release of HP 7. Last year I decided to go back and reread all the books. My dh bought me 6 for Christmas (the only one we didn't own), and I'm re-reading 7 now.

Is it classic lit? I don't know. Is it fun? Yes! As a Christian, I don't feel threatened by it.

[readwithem]

So, we hold off on them because I don't think they are appropriate for our children when they are young. By the time our children have reached the age that I think it would be okay, they have no interest in the books.


This has been our experience as well. So many books, so little time. The Harry books while not banned have never risen to the top of the "to be read" stack. They're not as compelling here as Jane Austen.

[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

[JuJuBee]

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. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/forum/trolls.gif (http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/%5Burl=http://www.freesmileys.org%5D%5Bimg%5Dhttp://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/forum/trolls.gif%5B/img%5D%5B/url%5D)

[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. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/forum/trolls.gif (http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/%5Burl=http://www.freesmileys.org%5D%5Bimg%5Dhttp://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/forum/trolls.gif%5B/img%5D%5B/url%5D)

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. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/confused005.gif (http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/%5Burl=http://www.freesmileys.org%5D%5Bimg%5Dhttp://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/confused005.gif%5B/img%5D%5B/url%5D)

[*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 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYLMTvxOaeE)!

[*anj*]

Well, STOP IT (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYLMTvxOaeE)!
http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/laughing008.gif (http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/%5Burl=http://www.freesmileys.org%5D%5Bimg%5Dhttp://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/laughing008.gif%5B/img%5D%5B/url%5D)
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 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYLMTvxOaeE)!


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.

[Karin]

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).

[Eliana]

I
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.


You've said this so beautifully, thank you, Daisy! Yes, this is why we are so careful about what our children see and hear and read...

I think there is a distinction that should be made between having all our reading be Great Books and choosing to carefully select what we consume. Our family allows some fluff, but it is all carefully chosen fluff... harmless (by our family's standards).

Thank you again, Daisy for finding such perfect words to express a conviction we also feel very strongly.

Eliana

[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.]

[QUOTE=Peek a Boo;70695]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.

[Eliana]

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" ?

Oh, no. Oh, dear, no.

We make the choices we feel are right for our family, which are true to our values and our priorities. ...and we talk about it with our children.

I feel such nachas watching our older girls blossoming into young women with such a strong sense of who they are and so grounded in our family's values and culture. They are confident in who they are and respectful of other people's choices... they have internalized our mantra that different families make different choices.

They've also internalized our conviction that we must think for ourselves and not follow the herd. They question assumptions (respectfully), they think things through, and they make decisions based on their intellects, their hearts, and their convictions... not on what everyone else is doing or what will other people think.

If you and your husband feel this particular series is not an issue, great. But if either of you are concerned about it, I would urge you not to consider 'what everyone else' might be doing, but to decide based on your family's values.

Eliana

[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.

[Eliana]

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

I didn't understand Daisy to be saying that anyone else should avoid HP. AIUI, she was objecting to the idea that 'books are just entertainment it doesn't matter what you consume'.

I saw it as an argument for consciously choosing the input our children get... some of us do that with screening, some with discussions (our family loves both), or in other ways, but do you really think, to take an extreme example, that your dd would get anything positive out of an issue of Playboy or a SM video? What the input is *does* matter... which input you choose depends on your family's approach, priorities, and values...

What you are saying about 'the individual reader' is so very true... and is another reason our family screens things... so we can tailor the input to the child. (Please don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that *you* should screen things the way I do (or at all), just that we agree on a principle and this is a way my family chooses to implement it.)


Eliana

[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.

[j.griff]

For arguments sake, IF my dd wanted to look at a Playboy or SM video, she "could" learn something that would "turn her on" in the future, in a s*xual relationship with her spouse. OR, reading an article in Playboy, she could learn about something personally applicable to herself, etc. :D She could learn the "how's" of s*x in a more private, less embarassing way than asking a real live person ;) IF that's what she'd rather do. <shrug>
BUT, I already stated that I do not want to debate this aspect of our values here, in another post. Different people have different interests, and I don't like judging others interests- even if they aren't for "me", KWIM? I mean, there's a reason there is a p*rn industry- people like it, people make money off it, etc. If it had absolutely no value to anyone, it wouldn't exist.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

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?

If you want to reply to a particular message, hit either the quote button or the little icon on the end -- that will put your reply directly under the person you are "talking" to.

If you have a more general reply, the Post Reply button will have you reply to the thread as a whole or the subthread you're in when you post.

I just use the buttons inside the message I'm replying to, and that seems to work.

Learning curve, eh? ;)

[j.griff]

People view these threads in different ways, you can either quote the person you are replying to, or you can hit the reply button at the bottom of the actual post you are replying to, rather than the button at the bottom of the page- it helps keep the thread in order for those who use the threaded view or hybrid view.

[Eliana]

For arguments sake, IF my dd wanted to look at a Playboy or SM video, she "could" learn something that would "turn her on" in the future, in a s*xual relationship with her spouse. OR, reading an article in Playboy, she could learn about something personally applicable to herself, etc. :D She could learn the "how's" of s*x in a more private, less embarassing way than asking a real live person ;) IF that's what she'd rather do. <shrug>
BUT, I already stated that I do not want to debate this aspect of our values here, in another post. Different people have different interests, and I don't like judging others interests- even if they aren't for "me", KWIM? I mean, there's a reason there is a p*rn industry- people like it, people make money off it, etc. If it had absolutely no value to anyone, it wouldn't exist.

Well, yes, clearly everything that is out there is of value to someone. :)

And I can see that one could turn anything into a springboard for discussion.... but I suspect that we each have criteria for what we choose to allow into our homes, and what we use as springboards for discussion. I was trying to pick examples which seemed far enough out that they were unlikely to be a choice most families would make... not to make any analogies, but to say that I think everyone draws lines somewhere.

I'm not trying to debate value systems, and I'm certainly not trying to judge anyone... about HP or in general. I'm very, very sorry if it sounded as if I were.

Eliana

[Peek a Boo]

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

You betcha.

"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."

and if i offer a skewed interpretation, i would expect someone to offer an opposing side. That happens a LOT, esp w/ scripture. Considering there are lots of people lurking, I offer the info not necessarily for the person to whom I am responding, but also for those saying --hey....that seems like an important point....

I'll feel free to elaborate cuz there have been a LOT of discussions about HP, and I like it when someone offers as much info at one time as possible. :cool:

And as Pam mentioned, "why's" were a reasonable question. I disagree that every response needs to be cut n dried. I think there is room for discussion. And I think I gave a lot of room for different viewpoints in my own post :)

ftr, i don't think this is a troll either. :D

[Peek a Boo]

I'm not trying to debate value systems, and I'm certainly not trying to judge anyone... about HP or in general. I'm very, very sorry if it sounded as if I were.

Eliana

It is kinda hard to have a discussion about personal values w/o ticking off people, lol. Don't sweat it too much. The magic words are "it works well this way for our family." :cool:

[j.griff]

I wasn't trying to imply that you were judging anyone's decision, :) and I wasn't offended by your post (though I suspect many will be offended by my reply, though that's not my intention). I just said that *I* don't like to judge others decisions or interests at all. Oh, phooey, I'm not saying that you "are" judging them, LOL, just that I kind of extremely dislike anything remotely judgemental about other peoples choices, does that make any sense? And I'm not judging others who do make such judgements, LOL. Clear as mud? ;)
Yes, lots of people draw lines, and those will be different for every family. Some people are a bit radical and don't have any "lines" though- some may have dotted lines when it comes to the legality of children's/family members choices- and some may not. :D

[lovemyboys]

Good question. I think it was more about the emphasis -- it was obvious that HP would be front and center with the teachers and libraries for the kids. Let's face it, the whole thing was exciting, new, different and the kids were responding. From a literary perspective, HP books are so long that you could read a number of books that are "great literature" in the same amount of time. Then again, for a kid to tackle a 200-pg. story after finishing off one of the later HP's might feel like a piece of cake even if the content was weightier. Hmmm.

Dc here are just getting to the age and reading levels that they might want to tackle one, we'll see.

[Eliana]

From a literary perspective, HP books are so long that you could read a number of books that are "great literature" in the same amount of time. Then again, for a kid to tackle a 200-pg. story after finishing off one of the later HP's might feel like a piece of cake even if the content was weightier. Hmmm.

Although librarians, teachers, and pundits expected the HP phenomenon to get kids hooked on reading, it really hasn't worked out that way, either in studies:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/may/05/books.booksnews

or in the anecdotal reports I've heard from teachers and librarians.

One reported that the kids who started reading with enthusiasm with the HP books have gone on to manga and anime or back to Goosebumps, not on to other fantasy, and certainly not on to weightier works.

It makes sense. Reading isn't all alike, and reading one kind of thing doesn't lead on to another automatically.

BTW, I do not mean this as a criticism of HP! I say the same thing about any light weight thing my kids do read... there isn't an easy fix to get non-readers to be readers.

Eliana

[LaMere Academy]

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. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/confused005.gif (http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/%5Burl=http://www.freesmileys.org%5D%5Bimg%5Dhttp://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/confused005.gif%5B/img%5D%5B/url%5D)

I find it interesting that the OP hasn't been back to discuss further...

[LaMere Academy]

We are Christians and we love Harry Potter, the books and movies. I think they are good children's books and there are some great themes in the story. We enjoy them.

When the first 4 books were out, they finally came to my attention, my mom bought them for our oldest and I read them aloud to him, since I've read all the rest aloud, going back and rereading the first 4 to my dd when she was around 9 or 10...now I'm rereading them again to the younger two. I never would have handed them over without reading them as well.

[Peek a Boo]

Well, I wasn't looking for anyone to "bite."

i'm sure YOU weren't, but having been around discussion boards long enough, i know there are many out there who were likely itching to answer but not willing to enter the foray :)


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.

Right. And that death was all bound up in God's love for us --God *is* Love. That's all i meant.


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?

I do need to clarify -- scripture says the mark is forced, not necessarily taken willingly. However, Scripture also says there IS a choice. But that choice will mean beheading. If the mark you are told to wear comes w/ a "wear this or be killed by us" kinda warning, then that's a dead giveaway we're talking about the scene in Revelations. [pun intended]. If the refusal to take a mark does NOT result in death, then it likely does not match what scripture warns about. {{we might need a separate thread just for exploring the mark, lol}}

so.....That goes right back to what the "scar" is all about. To begin with, Jesus did not equate a lightning bolt itself with the mark of the Beast --He equated the speed of satan's fall w/ that of how quickly lightning strikes. So we still have no evidence of what this mark is. Some might say that the ashes received on the forehead during lent are "the mark". But scripture does not say that anything on the forehead is bad-- it says the mark will be used expressly for buying and selling and come w/ a lethal alternative. That happens nowhere with this scar. edited to add: don't forget that the phylacteries are told to be bound to the forehead and hands too. Interesting correlation....

anyway....

Harry was never given a choice, the scar has nothing to do w/ buying and selling, and not everyone was forced to receive this mark. If it isn't the mark received in Revelations, then the kids are not copying Revelations, but a fictional story that does not follow scripture. Some people won't wear wedding bands because of certain personal convictions based on scripture and the pagan origins of it. Some keep their dress and hair and makeup to a minimum to keep them from being sucked in to vanity. Some keep their possessions to a bare minimum to stay far away from materialism. Others determine that it is a heart issue.


The children wearing a washable temporary tattoo as a Harry Potter fan craze are most likely NOT wearing the mark of the beast for purchasing power. If they aren't, there's no horror to be desensitized to. i do believe we need to be on the lookout for those things revealed in scripture, but i also believe that we need to make sure that what we are seeing is discerned as something we DO need to be horrified at or something that has little to do w/ what God has actually told us. I absolutely believe that when that day comes, there will be No Doubt as to the horror of such an occurrence. People will be beheaded. That is, if you are following a literal reading of scripture. as you mentioned, if one doesn't believe that, this discussion would be total hogwash;)


I can appreciate that you are concerned w/ the desensitization of children. I simply don't share that concern over this particular issue based on my own understanding of scripture. Thankfully the Body is composed of members that look nothing like each other. Hearts, toes, rectums, and snot, lol. They look different and focus on different things, but they all work to the glory of God.

i do not say all this to convince you one way or the other --that is not my job :-) I only offer this [as i said earlier] for others who might have the same question and might be looking for more info. And even if one decides that the scar part isn't necessarily relevant, there are still PLENTY of reasons to avoid HP, lol. Good discussion tho!

[Eliana]

I wasn't trying to imply that you were judging anyone's decision, :) and I wasn't offended by your post (though I suspect many will be offended by my reply, though that's not my intention). I just said that *I* don't like to judge others decisions or interests at all. Oh, phooey, I'm not saying that you "are" judging them, LOL, just that I kind of extremely dislike anything remotely judgemental about other peoples choices, does that make any sense? And I'm not judging others who do make such judgements, LOL. Clear as mud? ;)
Yes, lots of people draw lines, and those will be different for every family. Some people are a bit radical and don't have any "lines" though- some may have dotted lines when it comes to the legality of children's/family members choices- and some may not. :D

Oh, good! I was afraid I my extreme examples had come across as insulting or judgmental, or, worse yet, that my whole tone had seemed that way.

Your response wasn't offensive at all!

You were using my example to make the, very true, point that anything can have educational value (or value in general), depending on the user/consumer/family and his/her/their goals, values, and priorities.

Lines isn't the best image is it? Let me try to rephrase: given that we all have a limited amount of time in our lives, or even in a given day, we make choices about how we spend our time, what we read, what we see, what we do... and we "ought" to be making those choices in harmony with our respective values & priorities.

When Daisy said: "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 heard that as a response to the idea that one would let a child have something one believed inappropriate so s/he would fit in with other kids. (The 'inappropriate' being relative to a given family, not a universal).

However, when I reread her post and my enthusiastic response, I can see how it would bother you. You're right, it does have several assumptions in there which aren't reasonable or fair ones to make about a large, diverse group. I'm sorry. I didn't see that my first time through, I reacted to how well parts of it expressed my own family's approach.

And you are right that the choice not to filter at all can be as much a decision of principle as is mine to filter (if it is made from conscious conviction rather than lack of thought).

My mother was actually more on your end of the spectrum - she didn't screen our reading choices (though she was very selective about what she purchased and what she suggested to us). We read very widely and discussion was a large part of our family life. (The experiences I had with this are actually part of the reason we screen for our children, but that is a different discussion, and doesn't invalidate my mother's original convictions.)

Thank you for discussing this with me! I enjoy hearing your thoughts.

Eliana

[Call Me Cordelia]

1.) They are too busy reading LotR.

2.) Depsite the LotR movie, I just have a thing about "popular culture" that turns into a "thing" with movies and merchandise, etc... I feel more generous if it's considered good literature like LotR and Narnia, although I realize some think HP is awesome literature.

3.) They have expressed no interest, not spending a great deal of time around anyone else who is really into the books/movies.

4.) Not really into glorifying witchcraft, etc... Don't know if the books do or not, although it seems to be a theme. We all listened to and then watch LotR together, so can discuss it intelligently/appropriately. I'm not big on Nanny or the Poppins gal either, but don't feel the need to ban them, just discuss them. I'm not big on parts of Narnia, for that matter.

If one of my kids expresses any desire at all to read the books, I'll probably read them first. But so far, no one's remotely interested.

[PiCO]

We've encouraged our kiddos to read HP. However, my cousin is opposed b/c they feel Harry represents a defiant child. He ends up on the winning side of the issue, but is repeatedly oppositional to his authority figures. It's an interesting argument.

This is part of why HP appeals to me. I don't want my children blindly obeying authority figures. Better have a reason not to, though. And some cohorts to run your ideas by are always a good idea. ;)

[Colleen]

Goodness, folks, let's remember not everyone hangs out online all day long. (Whereas others of us ~ cough, cough ~ taking a break from school this week ~ haven't a single other thing to do....Who me?!;)) The question was just asked last night.

[j.griff]

Whew, LOL, I'm glad you enjoy the discussion and aren't offended. It's so hard to be clear in this format at times.
My childhood and life experiences are what have lead me to make the choices I have too. :D
My mom was very lenient, let me date older men, let me spend the night with friends that I shouldn't have, let me go out with people I shouldn't have, and was pretty naive or rather in denial. She even let me spend the night with my dh at a 26yo man's house (26yo worked with us and was a friend of dh and I), and while she said I could talk to her about "anything", there was a certain "shame" put on certain topics. That was the result of her childhood, which was not at all pleasant- the girls in her large family were shamed because of the fact that they were girls, etc.
I would much rather have my DC exposed to things in our home, and have them ask their questions without any feeling of shame or humiliation for talking about the subject (drugs, sex, alchohol, etc). I guess this would be a whole 'nother thread though, :D So I'm done.

[Karin]

1.) They are too busy reading LotR.

.

I'm just wondering if they've read the entire Anne of Green Gables series, with your moniker being Call Me Cordelia...One could argue that there's a lot of fantasy, etc, in some of those books (but not witch craft!) :) I've been reading some of them to my 9 yo.

[Peek a Boo]

She's viewing the thread right now. : )


well I for one hope she doesn't feel too off-put to jump in :D

i bite, but not that hard :cool: i promise to be nice and reserved to her since she's new and all. I'll take it out on Toni later, mwahahahahaha.

[GothicGyrl]

well I for one hope she doesn't feel too off-put to jump in :D

i bite, but not that hard :cool: i promise to be nice and reserved to her since she's new and all. I'll take it out on Toni later, mwahahahahaha.
You just remember that my fangs are just as sharp as your claws, little lady. ;)

I'm calling you now...hehe

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Goodness, folks, let's remember not everyone hangs out online all day long. (Whereas others of us ~ cough, cough ~ taking a break from school this week ~ haven't a single other thing to do....Who me?!;)) The question was just asked last night.

And it was a sick day for me, so here I am. Again.

[Call Me Cordelia]

I'm just wondering if they've read the entire Anne of Green Gables series, with your moniker being Call Me Cordelia...One could argue that there's a lot of fantasy, etc, in some of those books (but not witch craft!) :) I've been reading some of them to my 9 yo.


LOL. One could argue almost anything about almost any book!! I will never forget some of the scathing reviews I read about Elsie Dinsmore and Christy. Not that any book is perfect, but these reviewers were heated, by golly.

Alas, while they all like the movies and we have recently been enjoying Tales from Avonlea (TV show) on dvd from the library, not a one has really taken to Anne in book form.

And then, of course, some of LMM's books make some serious statements about theology. (One really takes on predestination in a most humerous form.)

[Donna T.]

Peek A Boo, I agree with everything you said (theologically) except I do believe the children are being desensitized to the taking of the mark and I do believe HP is a part of that process. I believe it is a deliberate part of the brainwashing process that has to occur and it's one of multiple clear signs that we are at the end of the age. That's what we believe and that's why we won't give the books to our children to read. Also, I do not believe the future mark will be a lightning bolt but the lightning bolt is an occultic symbol of enlightenment. When that day comes, the deception will be so great, as you know. The deception won't come over night... there is a process. A whole generation has to be conditioned to receive a false Messiah. Willingly. Conditioning doesn't happen quickly. Maybe (well, clearly) you don't see a connection and I understand that. I deeply respect that because I haven't always seen it myself. But, unfortunately, after studying this for about three years, I now believe and am convinced that there is a connection. I do hope I'm wrong.


Many warmest regards,
Donna T.

[Peek a Boo]

. Conditioning doesn't happen quickly. Maybe (well, clearly) you don't see a connection and I understand that. I deeply respect that because I haven't always seen it myself. But, unfortunately, after studying this for about three years, I now believe and am convinced that there is a connection. I do hope I'm wrong.
Many warmest regards,
Donna T.

all i can add is that even those who have studied it their entire lives at seriously deep levels disagree with what the signs will look like, so I can't say you are entirely wrong ;) Thanks for your thoughts!

[Karin]

Alas, while they all like the movies and we have recently been enjoying Tales from Avonlea (TV show) on dvd from the library, not a one has really taken to Anne in book form.



Well, having just read the entire series, I think some of the books in it are more fun and interesting than others, especially for children. I'm done with LMM for now, as I have other reading on my agenda for the moment. My 12 yo never took to it, either, so we listened to the first 2 on tape.

[Virginia Dawn]

Um, because *I* was busy reading them? ;) (Okay, now that all the books have been published, that's not going to be a problem any more...)

The only thing that will keep me from allowing a child to read one is if I feel he is not capable of separating fiction from reality.

Ds's 17 and 14 have read every one. Ds 8yo read book 1 and has attempted some of the others only to lay them aside. He has listened to every audio recording however. He has also watched the pg movies, not the pg-13 ones, but that's standard policy.

The 3yo is not allowed to watch any of the movies or read the books. ;)

[redmom3]

:eek:I asked this question last night and thought I would look to see if anyone had replied!!
I am sorry-I have a chronic sinus infection and had a CT scan done today-not to mention a very irritating sinus probe. My ENT wants to put me on two months of antibiotics-have you ever heard of this? I do not want surgery-I had sinus surgery when I was twelve that has left scarring and now I have polyps and very bad infection. Woe is me :(
Anyway, I have been a super careful mom of any and all influences on my 13dd who was my one and only- until three years ago.
Now I have a 3ds (very high maintenance) and a 1dd, recent miscarriage, feeling bad, etc etc,. I just don't have the time to think as much about some things and I heard a very nice respectable young woman in our church mention that she is reading Harry Potter and told dd she could read it too. My daughter loves fantasy, LOTR etc.
I have to admit that's all I went on-I did warn dd not to make a big deal of it, because dh is a pastor and it could offend some. Anyway, while babysitting for a friend of mine the other day, dd told her what she was reading and later my friend said "I can't believe her dad would let her read that!" No explanation and I really didn't want to ask.
I haven't read all the post here-I need to go to bed-but I will. Thank you ladies for being such a great source of info for me-about everything-It seems anytime something comes up in life there's a post about it here:)

[Peek a Boo]

If it's any help, I've heard pastors split on this issue too. "It's fiction --don't base your theology on it and you'll be fine" or "a Real christian doesn't need to ask if they should read HP --they should already know that it's evil." [[yes, i actually heard that phrase from the pulpit at the baptist church down the road. But I expected it}}.

If your dh is a pastor, has HE read them? In your specific situation, I would encourage your dh to read them so he can give an informed answer --regardles whether he comes down on the yay or nay side. Shoot --even show him this thread so he knows what kind of questions to expect, lol. But he should absolutely be ready to field questions ASAP. and the best way to do that is to have first hand info-- don't rely on anyone else's critique. Study it in light of your own personal convictions and decide from there.

hope you're feeling better soon!

[lovemyboys]

Thanks for the article, I'll have to look at it. My perspective is from the early days of the phenomenon, perhaps what some *hoped* would happen, that HP would launch kids into more weighty reading. Funny you brought up Goosebumps. I think that series and the babysitter's club books were what people were hoping to get kids beyond. Wonder what's coming next?

[redmom3]

You are so right-I have resolved to read them as dd finishes. I need to understand it all better and probably enjoy them too. As for Dh-we'll see:)
Right now he also has to work as a personal trainer (ok before you ask-he doesn't train me, I stay home and have only gained)
and doesn't have alot of extra time, but we are possible getting another church soon-full time.
Thanks for your encouragement.

[Friederike in Persia]

When you read through the lot, don't worry about the troll accusation. :eek:
I wouldn't have known either, that for some people this is a no-go area.
Thanks for the thread, I found it informative and liked it (and surely I wasn't the only one with that many replies!).

Peace,
Friederike

[Katia]

Redmom3,

My dh is a pastor as well. When these books first came out, the consensus in our homeschool group and the Christian community at large said they were evil and not to read them.

Well, tell me something is not to be read, and I will read it myself to form my own opinions! So I did, and I didn't see anything wrong with HP. I had my pastor dh read it and he didn't see anything wrong with it either, so I let my then 14yo son read it, with dh's approval.

However, I did NOT let my younger dds read these books. They were also very protected and simply not ready to read and understand what is contained within these books. The author herself said she will not let her children read them until they are older, and that they are not written as children's books (although they have been marketed that way), but rather she wrote them as a way to deal with death in her life as an adult.

I agree that it would be good for you and your dh to read these books so that you know the content. They are full of Christian symbolism. The author was not able to acknowledge this until the final one was published, but she now does so. For more information on that, check out hogwartsprofessor.com. Books by John Granger are great to help see the Christian symbolism and are also wonderful literary analysis tools in general. I'm so glad we discovered them.

I was so excited to read the post here by the lady who expressed what she felt Harry's scar represented and why. Wow! What a perfect example of Christian symbolism, although the author of that post didn't realize it as she used the scar for a reason *not* to read the books! (a case of forming opinions by not reading)

She was right on target that Harry's scar is a symbol of evil. It is the sign of an evil curse and he hates it and wishes it was gone. It is the sign that he has evil in his life. It takes him years to discover the extent of the wickedness of that evil, how to fight it and how to love perfectly and completely. It is only when he is willing to give his life as a sacrifice that the evil is conquered and the sign of evil as represented by the scar is removed from both his forehead and his life. Powerful stuff!

[j.griff]

I just wanted to clarify, LOL, that dd does not look at P*rn mags or videos, and no- I would not allow that. She's free to choose whatever she wants when she is 18, and I am pretty lenient on lots of things, but *I* wouldn't allow that.
I just didn't want you all thinking I'm some crazy whacko mom that gives my dc beer and p*rn, LOL. :D
('cause I'm a control freak and need to have "some" control over how people see me, LOL)

[j.griff]

Um- SPOILER ALERT, LOL :D

[Lorna]

Redmom3,

My dh is a pastor as well. When these books first came out, the consensus in our homeschool group and the Christian community at large said they were evil and not to read them.

Well, tell me something is not to be read, and I will read it myself to form my own opinions! So I did, and I didn't see anything wrong with HP. I had my pastor dh read it and he didn't see anything wrong with it either, so I let my then 14yo son read it, with dh's approval.

However, I did NOT let my younger dds read these books. They were also very protected and simply not ready to read and understand what is contained within these books. The author herself said she will not let her children read them until they are older, and that they are not written as children's books (although they have been marketed that way), but rather she wrote them as a way to deal with death in her life as an adult.

I agree that it would be good for you and your dh to read these books so that you know the content. They are full of Christian symbolism. The author was not able to acknowledge this until the final one was published, but she now does so. For more information on that, check out hogwartsprofessor.com. Books by John Granger are great to help see the Christian symbolism and are also wonderful literary analysis tools in general. I'm so glad we discovered them.

I was so excited to read the post here by the lady who expressed what she felt Harry's scar represented and why. Wow! What a perfect example of Christian symbolism, although the author of that post didn't realize it as she used the scar for a reason *not* to read the books! (a case of forming opinions by not reading)

She was right on target that Harry's scar is a symbol of evil. It is the sign of an evil curse and he hates it and wishes it was gone. It is the sign that he has evil in his life. It takes him years to discover the extent of the wickedness of that evil, how to fight it and how to love perfectly and completely. It is only when he is willing to give his life as a sacrifice that the evil is conquered and the sign of evil as represented by the scar is removed from both his forehead and his life. Powerful stuff!

This was my feeling too when reading Harry Potter. There are many books I am reluctant to let my children read (and luckily they choose not to read them). My headmistress mother thinks Jacqueline Wilson and Anne Fine books are great ways to get children reading. I find them badly written with a bad attitude. They certainly don't lead onto classic fiction.
I wouldn't let a young child read Harry Potter, but for the same reasons I wouldn't let a young child read the C S Lewis books or Lord of the Rings: violence and cruelty. I am still unsure why Harry Potter is different to Tolkien or Lewis. They are written very much in the same tradition of Christian symbolism. And, in my ignorant opinion, they are written just as well. :eek:

[PariSarah]

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

I think she is saying that she was engaging in some speculative imagining. As in, "Okay, I've allowed it. But let's suppose for a minute that I had decided not to allow it. What would be some good reasons to back up that decision?"

Sorta like preparing the opposing POV for a debate, only not because you're intending to tear it to shreds. Instead because you're assuming that the "other side" is not crazy--they just have (perfectly good) reasons that didn't particularly move you.

I do that from time to time--respectfully answer a question as if I agreed with my own answer, while clarifying, just for honesty's sake, that it was not my own position. Or pointing out how far even people who disagree on something can agree on something. ("Well, no, I don't share your conviction that Carolina Blue is, in fact, an attractive color; however, since I do think of Duke Blue as God's own favorite color, I think we can at least agree that Blue is better than red. (Down with the Terps!)")

Anyway, at bottom, I agree with you. (And I suspect Pam mostly does too.) She was just pointing to a situation that might seem to be like what you're talking about, when really it's a respectful contribution from someone who wasn't necessarily addressed by the OP.

[Colleen]

Thanks, Sarah; I do understand now that Pam was answering theoretically. No doubt ~ we all do that from time to time. What gave me pause in this thread were the "I have no idea" replies and what I perceived as efforts to explain/correct the thinking of those who offered reasons why they don't choose HP. (Hmm...that last bit is rather long-winded but I'm not up to rewording right now. And after all, you're good at translation.;))

[Jackie in AR]

I haven't prevented my dc from reading Harry Potter; they've just never had an interest in reading them.

When Harry first came out, we talked about the storyline, etc. Dc said they thought they sounded boring and that they could think of lots of other books they would prefer to read.

They've read LOTR, Narnia, etc., but for some reason HP doesn't interest them.

[kdeno]

I honestly don't understand the witchcraft argument. Snow White has a witch that casts a spell. Little Mermaid has the same. This is not meant to be a confrontational statement. I just don't know what the difference would be. I can see how the tone may be too dark for sensitive children. Mine have not read it for that reason--just personal choice.

We do not have a TV so it is not a big issue. Based on scriptures in the Bible against witchcraft we choose to avoid any movies or books that portray them, including some popular Christian series.

Kari

[Lorna]

Kari,
I was wondering if you avoid Shakespeare's 'A Midsummer Night's Dream' and 'Macbeth'? Do you read the Narnia books? Would you read a book such as 'The Witch of Blackbird Pond'? I am sorry to ask you to explain to yet another uneducated person but the Christians I know in Europe generally don't have these views on witches and fairies in literature. Have C S Lewis books and fairy tales always been avoided in American Christian culture, do you know?
Many thanks for sharing your views and knowledge.
Lorna

[j.griff]

Not Kari, but this view of witchcraft is not practiced by all American Christians- actually I'd say most don't avoid it. I do remember reading books about the Puritans though, where they avoiding any type of make-believe (no play acting- that would be "lying"). Of course, my views could be totall wrong, ;)

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Not Kari, but this view of witchcraft is not practiced by all American Christians- actually I'd say most don't avoid it. I do remember reading books about the Puritans though, where they avoiding any type of make-believe (no play acting- that would be "lying"). Of course, my views could be totall wrong, ;)

One of the issues as well is that there was an unfortunate re-naming of the first US edition of the book by Scholastic. John Granger (http://www.sylvaniachristian.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=113&Itemid=162) is an interesting source for a conservative Christian view of what kind of magic is being spoken of in the bible and what kind is used as symbolism in literature such as Potter, LOTR, etc. Googling "sorcery John Granger" will give you similar results, some of which aren't pre-digested on someone's blog. :p

Not trying to convince the OP, or even the OP of this thread, but just mentioning this as a topic for perusal for Lorna.

[kdeno]

Kari,
I was wondering if you avoid Shakespeare's 'A Midsummer Night's Dream' and 'Macbeth'? Do you read the Narnia books? Would you read a book such as 'The Witch of Blackbird Pond'? I am sorry to ask you to explain to yet another uneducated person but the Christians I know in Europe generally don't have these views on witches and fairies in literature. Have C S Lewis books and fairy tales always been avoided in American Christian culture, do you know?
Many thanks for sharing your views and knowledge.
Lorna

Hi Lorna,

I avoid Narnia and Shakespeare for now. I have not read Witch of Blackbird Pond so I can't say. I do not think most American Christians have this view. I def do not think CS Lewis is avoided. Most friends allow their young children to watch the LOTR trilogy. I prefer to just not go there.

Thank you for your kindness and deference :-)

Kari

[Eliana]

We do not have a TV so it is not a big issue. Based on scriptures in the Bible against witchcraft we choose to avoid any movies or books that portray them, including some popular Christian series.

Kari


I find this confusing (though, of course, I respect that you are making the choices which your belief system indicates are best for your family.).

There are many things which are forbidden in the Torah, do you feel that you should avoid any portrayal of those should also be completely avoided?

Violating Shabbos is also a 'death penalty' offense - should we avoid books in which people are lighting fires on Saturday? The Iliad b/c there is adultery? Any book in which people engage in idolatry (for me that would mean not reading books with Xtians or Xtianity - those who exclude Catholics from Xtianity would need to avoid books with Catholicism.)

I guess I do not follow the reasoning here. Unless we limit the books our children read to only those which adhere, in all ways, to our specific worldview, we will need to help our children learn how to respond to other faiths/other lifestyles/other values - in real life and in fiction.

I do believe that a child should be ready for this exposure - and we, personally, take great care with this. But, as I said, I am confused by the no-witches thing, especially if it is the only prohibition singled out.


Witchcraft itself is a complex topic. There are many, some very specific, terms used for various arts of divination.

I've heard that Xtians link witchcraft issues with Satan stuff, but perhaps that is a false rumor... since we don't have Satan (in the sense you do), that isn't the issue by us... so I am probably missing something here given my unconscious worldview assumptions.

Context: I am a traditionally observant Jew, and I take every pasuk of the Torah very seriously indeed. (Our clothing is checked to ensure we do not wear items with a mixture of wool and linen, for example.)

But there is nothing in my world that even begins to compare to the way Harry Potter, et al are viewed in some Xtian circles.... it is forbidden for those who hold that reading any fiction is bitul Torah (basically a waste of time that would be better spent learning Torah), but for those who allow secular fiction, there is no specific issue. (Our family does't do HP, but it has nothing to do with the fantasy 'sorcery')

I'm being confused a lot lately, aren't I?

*sigh*

I hope you can 'hear' that I'm not trying to pick on you, Kari... I'm just curious how you reason this.

Eliana

[Lorna]

Hi Lorna,

I avoid Narnia and Shakespeare for now. I have not read Witch of Blackbird Pond so I can't say. I do not think most American Christians have this view. I def do not think CS Lewis is avoided. Most friends allow their young children to watch the LOTR trilogy. I prefer to just not go there.

Thank you for your kindness and deference :-)

Kari

Thank you Kari too. It is good to hear your views. I know how wearing it is to have to defend decisions we have made in order to give our children the best possible upbringing. I admire you for yours. :)

Thank you for the other replies too and link. Very interesting.