Why does intention matter? A 6 year old kid born 60 years after something was written does not know anything about any supposed intention. They only know what the material itself says.
If the material does not stand on it's own, then it serves no valid purpose to artficialy prop it up.
It's not censorship to remove something from being actively fed to children. It's still allowed to exist as historical artifacts. No one arrests you for posessing a copy. You are not Jesus's persecuted followers hiding from the Romans.
Who says what does or does not stand on its own? I am not seeing any negative stereotyping there, just colorful characters.
You might argue that I ought to be Chinese to have a say about it. And that'd be fair - let's ask Chinese people then! I'd be curious what they actually think. Personally, as a Jew, I wouldn't mind at all to see a "stereotypical" Orthodox depiction of a jew, with a yarmulke and all, as long as it's not negative. I fact, I might appreciate it as an artifact educating the audiences about my people's original culture.
> Its removal came after authors Mo Willems, Mike Curato and Lisa Yee co-signed a letter calling for its removal. They described the imagery as “a jarring racial stereotype of a Chinese man, who is depicted with chopsticks, a pointed hat, and slanted slit eyes. We find this caricature of ‘the Chinaman’ deeply hurtful, and have concerns about children’s exposure to it.”
The point is that this stereotypical description is negative.
If the material does not stand on it's own, then it serves no valid purpose to artficialy prop it up.
It's not censorship to remove something from being actively fed to children. It's still allowed to exist as historical artifacts. No one arrests you for posessing a copy. You are not Jesus's persecuted followers hiding from the Romans.