Banned books - another question

[davewitley]

I share most people's bemusement at the titles that have been 
challenged (Tom Sawyer?  What could be more all-American than 
that?).  I also support the arguments that have been put forward 
about children and their parents normally being the arbiters, rather 
than others.

However, I'm a little puzzled (perhaps because, as an un-American, I 
get by without a constitution and we don't seem to have 
this 'challenging' phenomenon here in the UK) as to what the aim of 
the ALA is on this issue.

As I understand it, it is not the government, or some official body, 
that tries to get books removed from library shelves - this is 
ordinary citizens making a challenge to their (local?) libraries.

So what does ALA want?  To take away the right to challenge the 
material on library shelves?  Or just to educate the population so 
that they use that right in a different way?  What is the purpose of 
the right existing at all?  If (as someone suggested) having a 
book 'banned' (from libraries, of course, not shops or homes) is a 
breach of constitutional rights, how can the right to challenge be 
contitutional?

Given that the USA has a population of over 300 million, and there 
are perhaps a few thousand (mostly failed) challenges a year, yes, 
the ALA may be right that there are too many of them, but the 
overwhelming impression left is that the USA does indeed do what it 
says on the tin - support freedom of speech and the freedom to read.

David