While the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) finds it inappropriate for Christians to profess their faith in public schools, they do want to make sure that children in Miami elementary schools are exposed to Communist propaganda. They’re filing suit “to stop the Miami-Dade County school district from removing a series of children’s books from its libraries, including a volume about Cuba which depicts smiling kids in communist uniforms.“
Now, if this were a high school, I might be more sympathetic to the ACLU’s argument “that the school board should add materials with alternate viewpoints rather than remove books that could be offensive.” But, we’re talking about books targeted to children aged 5 to 7.
The school board voted 6-3 to remove the books after “a parent who said he had been a political prisoner in Cuba complained about the books’ depiction of life under communist rule.” While the ACLU may call this censorship, a quick search of the web that the book is still available in the United States. So, all that’s happening is a local school district is deciding which books it wants in its libraries. And that’s where the decision should be made, not in a federal court as the ACLU would have it.
In demanding that the school libraries shelve these books, the “ACLU noted the books have received favorable reviews in nationally recognized publications including Publishers Weekly and the School Library Journal.” These journals review favorably children’s books presenting a favorable opinion of the Communist tyranny in the Caribbean?! A sad commentary on the state of the publishing world.
The school staff favors keeping the books. That’s no wonder, given that the American Library Association “refused to pass a resolution condemning Fidel Castro for jailing librarians.” (via Michelle Malkin.) Maybe those Cuban librarians hadn’t read the School Library Journal.
I guess we should be grateful public school libraries (in most states) are under the supervision of elected school boards which answer to the people.
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com
UPDATE: Since first posting this piece, I have added a link to its first clause.
I’m against censorship, but in this case we’re talking about young school-age children that could easily be duped into thinking “everything in Cuba is swell”. But on the other hand, do we want some other group demand book like “Heather has Two Mommies” be ban? I suppose one should be because of it just “lies” and the other allow each parent to opt-out his or her own kid(s).
I bet if the school wants to ban book like Help! Mom! There are Liberals Under My Bed! the ACLU will have no problem with it.
Oy. Read closely, people. The school board is banning an entire SERIES of books on the basis of the objection by one parent to the book on Cuba. So, you’ve just read the usual simplistic spin by which our esteemed Patriot suggests that the ACLU is filing suit over the banning of one book.
Leave behind the question of whether there’s something inherently wrong with depicting smiling children in killer Commie uniforms. (Perhaps they are smiling because their literacy and infant mortality rates are so much better than America’s.) Why should an entire series be blown off the shelves too?
And comparing a series about life in other countries — a series that fails to propagandize against Fidel’s socialism in one book — to the promotion of Christian ideology is specious-beyond-the-pale. The book does not promote communism.
OY.
Donny, perhaps I should have been clearer in my first line–as I wrote it, I was thinking of the ACLU’s opposition to prayers at public school graduation ceremonies.
And Kyle makes a great point about the downside of local control of public school libraries — because it would mean that some Christian groups might try to get books like “Heather has Two Mommies” banned.
The fact of the matter is that you haven’t read any of the damn books!
Sorry, but I just don’t believe in removing books from a library. Any book, any library. If you don’t think something is age-appropriate to a child, fine, put it up on a high shelf. But you don’t get rid of a book from a library because someone doesn’t like what it says.
What Patrick said.
As for the positive reviews, though — it’s not surprising. ALA is pretty much a kneejerk leftist organization. I’m a librarian myself, but I dropped my membership in ALA quite a few years ago, chiefly because they take so many political stands unrelated to librarianship, and refuse to take political stands related to librarianship if those stands would conflict with a commitment to leftist politics (such as the Fidel Castro situation you mention).
According to this piece, the ACLU said a Nevada high school did the right thing to pull the plug on its valedictorian as she was about to talk about her Christian faith. And that’s what I was referring to in the opening sentence; I have since added the link to the appropriate clause.
I’m sorry to have to inform you, but the fact is that the ACLU is correct in both cases.
One, regarding the removal of books from the school library, the sad fact is that the removal was a result of content-based discrimination which is pretty much forbidden under 1st amendment jurisprudence. If the school library had not purchased the books and placed them on the shelves in the first place–possibly excused because of budgetary reasons–it is highly unlikely that the ACLU would have gotten involved. On the other hand, given the facts that the books had already been purchased and were on the shelf, and that they were were to be removed only because someone objected to their content, it is highly likely that the removal was based on content, and nothing more. Content-based discrimination.
Two, regarding the intro While the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) finds it inappropriate for Christians to profess their faith in public schools…, that case has been discussed at more than a few knowledgeable venues, including Las Vegas Graduation Uproar: The School Was Wrong from Ed Brayton’s blog Dispatches from the Culture Wars. I rarely disagree with Brayton, but I do there.
You seem to be missing a few points (no surprise). The speaker in the case was speaking at an official school activity (graduation ceremonies) and was chosen to speak by the school’s administration. Accordingly, it would not be unreasonable to presume that her comments had been given the school administration’s imprimature.
The speech had been vetted by the school administration, and she apparently deviated significantly from the text that had been approved by the school’s administration–which text she apparently had agreed to beforehand. So, her obviously intentional deviation from the text that she had agreed to was a breach of the bargain that she had made with the school. If she objected to the edits, she could have taken her objection up with the courts. The fact that she did not more than suggests that she was trying to pull a proverbial “bait and switch” with the school administration, and they were more than within their rights to pull the plug on her.
I find it more than a bit unsettling that so-called “christians” want to have prayers and proselytize at publicly sponsored events like these. If they want to pray or proselytize in public, there is nothing stopping them from doing so before or after the official event. I recognize that this kind of “pushing back” by the secularists in regards things like this, teaching of “evilution” or even the Big Bang theory, may result in the demise of publicly-financed education in the US, but I have to tell you that I don’t particularly care. My taxes will go down. I’m a perfect conservative.
Actually, the ACLU has been consistent and aggressive in its defense of the right to pray in public schools. They have opposed school- or state-sponsored religious activities, but they have a long history of defending the right to practice religious observances in public settings.
John, actually, the ACLU has even opposed private prayers in public schools.
Raj, I don’t know that the content-based discrimination arguments applies to elementary schools. It would be a sad day indeed, if federal courts did not allow elementary schools to choose which books to shelve — or to remove — from their shelves.
We may not like their choices, but, I believe the choice needs to be made at the local level. And If the school board can’t remove a book that the staff has selected, that gives the staff more power than the elected officials. All they need do is get a book for the school library without the school board knowing about it and then it’s there to stay.
Screw that. Look, a public library is exactly that, public. Its not there for the purpose of enforcing or even encouraging local community standards. It supposed to be a repository of information, not a classroom or church. What happens when someone wants to find a book on how Castro indoctrinates children with Communism? It works both ways you know. Look, like I said earlier, if you don’t’ want to let children have access to the book fine, but they have no fucking right to decide for me what I can and cannot read as an adult. The book should stay in the library.
You cannot have a functional and free democratic society unless libraries are free to have books in them with ideas that some people disagree with. To remove a book in this manner is just downright un-fucking-American.
As author Robert A. Heinlein wrote:
Gramps, you do realize that your famous science fiction writer was an avowed communist? Those guys didn’t wait for a civil debate to engage before banning, burning and raping libraries. Some choice of an “authority” on your part… did you get that quote off an ACLU or ALA site? Just kidding.
The argument of “pluralism defended” in your point about “… public library is exactly that, public” missed the debate because the library isn’t public because of who it lets in, or the diversity of books stocked… it’s public because PUBLIC TAX dollars paid for it, operate it, allow it to exist.
Also, when you argued “Look, like I said earlier, if you don’t’ want to let children have access to the book fine, but they have no f***ing right to decide for me what I can and cannot read as an adult.”
You’re 1000% correct. No one has a right to tell you what you can or cannot read –as long as it isn’t kiddie porn. But library boards have –for years– been selectively editing stock based on THEIR preferences, the budget, etc. No one can stop you from reading what you want –just go out and buy it, sit in the barco-lounger at home, open up the BudLite and knock yourself out. Leave the porkrinds in the pantry, tho… that blood pressure must be taking a beating these days of full tilt BDS. Again, just kidding Gramps.
No one should be forced to pay for you to be able to enter a library and expect stock to meet your expectations of approved reading materials. Selections, choices, preferences all accompany the choice of what is stocked… not whether the book meets your political correctness test.
In fact, the science writer you quote has been BANNED in about 270 libraries in the US for what liberal librarians thought was his sneaking of sexual explicit subplots into what was ostensibly a science fiction book aimed at young pre-teens. FYI: Many of those subplots were homosexual; and we wonder why str8 Americans think gays are out to recruit youth as converts to the gay lifestyle? Gheez. BUt you probably knew it ’cause he’s likely one of your favorite authors… fiction, sex, alternate worlds, fantasy, evil govts, corrupting businesses, conspiracies abound… yep, sounds like Heinlein was MADE for you.
Nope Gramps. The book should get busted. The authorities are correct (and Right) to keep it out. The ACLU is again putting itself on the wrong side of the debate –just like you.
Dan, this case is another instance of the Left failing to convince common sense people of the policy merits in the Left’s arguments… and running to activist judges for relief. It’s the avenue of choice for the ACLU, the eco-terrorists, the GayLeft, and so many other victims of the system.
Patrick, we’re talking about elementary school libraries. Personally, I believe libraries should carry a wide variety of books offering a great variety of perspectives, political and otherwise. But, the real question is who should decide what goes in those libraries, given limited shelf space.
Here, an elected school board decided. I would rather have that body decide than a federal court. Yet, understand how narrow some school boards have become of late.
#9 GayPatriotWest — June 22, 2006 @ 12:31 pm – June 22, 2006
John, actually, the ACLU has even opposed private prayers in public schools.
I’m sure that you can provide a citation.
Raj, I don’t know that the content-based discrimination arguments applies to elementary schools.
I suppose that we may find out.
We may not like their choices, but, I believe the choice needs to be made at the local level.
Choices made by government and governmental agencies at the state and local level are always reviewable by federal courts in light of the requirements of the US Constitution. You should know that. Otherwise, states and localities could ignore requirements of federal law, in violation of the Supremacy Clause.
#11 Michigan-Matt — June 22, 2006 @ 2:21 pm – June 22, 2006
Gramps, you do realize that your famous science fiction writer (Robert A. Heinlein) was an avowed communist?
Oh, my–I wasn’t aware of that. I presume that you could provide a citation to your claim. Virtually everything I read about him says the opposite, and “avowed communist” certainly doesn’t come through his writings–most of which I have read.
In fact, the science writer you quote has been BANNED in about 270 libraries in the US for what liberal librarians thought was his sneaking of sexual explicit subplots into what was ostensibly a science fiction book aimed at young pre-teens.
Oh, and which book was that? Stranger in a Strange Land? That book was certainly not directed to pre-teens–actually, I know of none of his writings that were directed to pre-teens. Stranger was directed to adults, although I did read it as a teenager shortly after it first came out in paperback.
Heinlein a Communist? Cite you source, damn you…..
When I was in school, Heinlein was viewed as a staunch Libertarian and militarist…and was considered too-far to the Right for the hippie-tastes of the draft-dogging teachers and librarians of the time. The usual thing he got in trouble for was his insistance on healthy sex-lives for his characters…wherever that lead. Even though his “gay” characters were never very convincing, though to his credit he generally avoided the obvious stereotypes….in a way they were among the first Post-Gay characters were their sexuality didn’t define them, it was just who they were.
Oh, where was I?…..
The best “solution” to censorship is to place a book of the opposing viewpoint next to the one objected to and give the reader the opportunity to actually learn something. The understanding that each author has an axe to grind is an important revalation in advancing scholarship. In my own collection I have four “biographies” of Chancellor Bismarck written over a 100-year span. Depending on the tastes and fashions of the times, you would never find the same man in each volume. Some just flat-out contradict eachother on “facts”, and their importance to the author’s own “interpretation” of the man.
Rather than ban books, add different interpretations and let the readers actually LEARN something.
Yes? And what of it? Having access to a wide variety of matierials of different depth and complexity of ideas is good for children. It gets their minds to work harder. Sorry, I’ve just been taught not to fear ideas from an early age. Having access to the whole range of a library from the time I could read gave me terrific benefits. By the time I left elementary I was already reading and writing at a post-college level (or so my entrance exams said). In Science, Biology, Physics, English, etc. I was able to sail through HS because I’d already been exposed to the subject matter earlier. And I’m not a genious, in fact I even have a mild learning disability. What I did have however was two parents that worked, and no money for a babysitter. So I got dumped by my parents at the library everyday. This stupid notion born of stupid 70’s pop-psychology books that exposing children to ideas is bad for their mental development is just ridculas.
And Michigan-Matt. Regarding your comments on Heinlein. LOL!. Never has your ignorance of the subject at hand been greater. Really. Never have you sounded soooooo…. stupid. But I’ll be charitable. Maybe you were thinking of someone else. Noam Chomsky? Then you might have a case.
Patrickk-it is an elementary school library-I would agree with you, if you were talking about a fully public library, or if it was at the middle or high school level, when absract thinking skills are more developed.
At the elementary level I think, and I want the school board and those in charge or purchasing books to be discriminatory to some degree in what they choose both in content, and in regards to age appropriateness.
I the school board opts to remove a book that glorifies communist Cuba, they should have every right to do so. If others in the community do not like the choice, then they should lobby the school board to change their mind.
One problem is that public, coersive, education already violates an individual’s freedom over what goes on in their own head. Private schools can have an aknowledged… tilt… and parents can chose or not chose the school in accordance with that. Public schools *must* serve *everyone*. A parent has the right to expect the school to educate their children, at the *very* least, in an ideologically neutral way. But that’s hard to do.
When it comes to censorship, the compulsory nature of public school *matters*.
And it’s simply true that every book assigned in class is a deliberate choice to NOT assign a vast array of other books. Every purchase for the school library is a choice NOT to purchase some other book.
And children’s books are notoriously “message” driven. Someone makes a choice to include that message or they make a choie to *ex*clude that message.
So who gets to decide? The librarian? The school board? The parents?
As for Heinlein… his publisher complained about the sexual imagery in his extremely sex-free stories for young people. I’ve read a few examples (I believe he changed them, but that doesn’t mean he couldn’t complain later) and the only sex had to have been in the minds of the editor. His later stuff is, of course, fueled by his secret hopes of group marriage mosh pits.
But Communist?