Arguably they should be lost to children though. Or kept as they are for older children to use as a learning tool about history and how things have changed.
It almost whitewashes the past as some sort of ultra wholesale era to remove words in this manner.
The idea that we don't have thousands of books more suitable for our time is nonsense. If you go into any bookshop you have walls full of amazing books.
Why do we need to tie children to our own past out of a sense of misplaced nostalgia.
I think where things are editted or removed there should be a very firm notice that it is no longer as originally intended but we should have old versions available to us still - not just old second hand copies either. Literary history and burning of books tells us that erasing history is unacceptable.
It's like statues. I don't think we should destroy ones we don't like. Move them to other places and/or provide an explanation of its significance - including the bad. And build new statues to heard the things we now feel important. But don't erase it. That erasure risks overly sanitising things. We need an understanding of why those things were bad too. We need visibility of the bad in order to do that and prevent us slipping in the future back to that out of some kind of backlash or ignorance of the past. This is the concept that holocaust remembrance is built on: visibility of the bad - we don't erase Nazis and the role of society as a whole which facilitated it - as part of that. We need to see how ingrained into society it was and how their peers viewed them as heroic and enabled if not supported and encouraged unacceptable behaviour.