z 
Constitution Warning Label
This is just extraordinary, a warning label applied to copies of the US Constitution and other significant documents from the period.
Per a FOX News.com story Publishing Company Under Fire for Putting Warning Label on Constitution:
Wilder Publications warns readers of its reprints of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, Common Sense, the Articles of Confederation, and the Federalist Papers, among others, that “This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today.”
The disclaimer goes on to tell parents that they “might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work.”
Tags: 5 Comments
5 responses so far ↓
This book has been published since 2007 with no complaints, and it’s a disclaimer put on all of their texts. The publisher said on the Alan Colmes show said he initially put this disclaimer on to shut up liberals about language used in other texts.
I don’t see what’s so bad if they put it on all their documents. Though I’m surprised these docs are in a separate book. My history texts had most of these somewhere in the back near the Sources section.
What galls me is (a) the PC-craziness of putting such a label on any of their product. Perhaps it would be warranted if they publish graphic sexual or violent material, but I doubt they do, (b) the implicit ‘you can’t think and decide for youselves so we’ll do it for you’ message and (c) the suggestion (even if unintentional) that the Constitution may be something parents should think twice about lettng their chidren read.
If they put this on ALL their publications regardless of whether they think it’s needed, then they are simply being lazy and therefore misleading those who are exposed to them. I don’t discount the possibility that the notice is there because the country has become litigation-crazy, too.
If the publisher is surreptitiously using this as a passive-aggressive dig at one political affiliation with which he has a beef, then that’s yet another reason I don’t like it.
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Some kid was intentionally struck by a car earlier in the year and recently died due to her injuries from the accident. I heard about it on WIBC, and the charges on the guy who allegedly did it have been upped to vehicular homicide.
What I meant to ask is I wasn’t sure if this homicide was included in your running total.
I’ heard they likely would file charges but not that they had. Thanks for the heads-up. I’ll add this one.