Maybe the most reasonable interpretation of people's professed desire to not ban books places them into two categories: books that inspire acts of terrorism or

Maybe the most reasonable interpretation of people's professed desire to not ban books places them into two categories: books that inspire acts of terrorism or are otherwise tantamount to inciting, and books which introduce political or personal concepts which a small number of people object to. Eliding the difference between the two seems a little absurd, if I may say so.