So, I was trying to be reasonable.

I was trying to have a reasonable conversation with the Plan2Succeed people, but it just isn't going to work out:

Leila, let's assume for the sake of argument there is a book written in a way that everyone agrees is entirely inappropriate for children -- the subject matter could be anything. Let's further assume that children who have had access to this book have all, without exception, had their lives or the lives of others significantly destroyed. I know of no book like that. This is just an assumption for this hypothetical. Let's also assume it is legal to keep children from reading such material. Would you then agree that such books if found in public libraries including school libraries should be kept away from children. Why or why not? Explain.

As a librarian, it isn't my job to pass judgment on what other people check out or on what other people read.  If someone wants to read V. C. Andrews, I'm not going to say, "No.  You can't take that because V. C. Andrews is crappy."  If someone asks me my opinion about V. C. Andrews, that's different.

What people read is their own business.  If a parent doesn't want their kid reading about certain things, it's up to the parent to police that.  Not the librarian.

If there was a book out there that "everyone agree[d] [wa]s entirely inappropriate for children", then it wouldn't be in the children's section, would it?  The problem is that everyone has a different opinion about what is appropriate.  My father gave me a book by Charlie Bukowski when I was in middle school--an author that few people would give to a young person.  But he knew that I was ready for it and that I would get a lot out of it.  (I did, by the way.  Still love that book).    

There are loads of books in the children's room that I can't stand for various reasons.  But that doesn't mean that I'd try to keep other people's kids from reading them.