I would argue that people are primarily reacting to the reasoning given by the parents; they're not upset that the book will not be used, but that the people ma

I would argue that people are primarily reacting to the reasoning given by the parents; they're not upset that the book will not be used, but that the people making the decision feel that the inclusion of (censored) profanity and nudity are objectionable enough to call for a change in curriculum. Certainly this is perhaps somewhat overblown, but I don't think it's fair to say that people are "angry that the legitimacy of their outrage is threatened" - I think your downvoters feel that you're missing the point. (I did not flag your comment, to be clear.) There's also the matter of disagreement about the word "banned"; personally I think it's not the right word to use here, but there is an argument to be made that the object of the verb is not students - that is, not making the book totally unavailable - but teachers. They have "banned" teachers from using it in the curriculum. Again, I don't agree with this use of the term, but I don't think it's as clear-cut as "the media is lying about what happened to support their narrative."