The Case For 'Book Banning'

Why the government has no right to promote whatever messages it wants to children

By a guest contributor

The editor of ResistanceMedia believes that degenerate books should be piled up, doused with gasoline, and set on fire, although the author of this guest article might disagree.

Whenever reasonable measures are introduced to give parents more control over what messages their children are exposed to at school, the left always reverts to hysterics about "book banning" and "censorship." However, these arguments are frivolous, intellectually dishonest, and without merit.

First of all, laws and policies (such as Virginia's proposed law allowing parents to block their children from reading sexually explicit content in their public school classrooms) do not constitute book banning. All these policies do is require schools to notify parents if their children will be reading sexually explicit material as part of official, formal class instruction. They do not affect what students can read in the school library, or what can be informally taught in class. This is why such policies are too weak - they simply serve to placate parents, and don't actually do much to prevent explicit "literature" from getting into the hands of children against the will of their parents.

There is absolutely no problem with a public institution, especially one to which parents entrust their children, banning books or material that goes against public morality. According to the Hyde Amendment, public funds cannot support the practice of elective abortion. The reason for this law's existence is because abortion is considered morally wrong by many, if not most, American taxpayers. To force them to pay for a procedure that they morally abhor, would be, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, "sinful and tyrannical."

In light of this, why is it so radical to demand that a public school, also financed with taxpayer dollars, not possess and distribute books which violate the parents' (and taxpayers') beliefs? For example, there are 22 copies of the book There is No Dog, written by atheist author Meg Rosoff, in Fairfax County, Virginia school libraries. This is a book that contains very explicit content depicting God engaged in sexual activity. There is No Dog has no place in a public school library.

Finally, school systems are already engaged in book banning and censorship, even though they don't want to admit it. According to the American Library Association, The Bible is the 7th most challenged book in public school libraries. Student-led Middle School Bible studies were recently banned by a Missouri district, on the ridiculous justification that serving donuts at the meeting constituted "pressur[ing] students into participating in prayer." Schools often tyrannically suspend or expel students for little more than dissenting from the Current Truth on issues of gender and sexuality.

Closer to home, in Fairfax County, a collection of books that conservative students and families offered to donate for free to West Springfield High School was rejected by the library. The stated reason was that the books, some of which opposed same-sex marriage, might offend students who identified as homosexual. But wouldn't There is No Dog, of which 22 copies exist throughout the Fairfax District, be offensive to Christian students?Does that matter?

However, these instances of explicit, open censorship of political and religious dissidents do not encompass the entire picture. Leftist school employees, through selection bias, "censor" or "ban" books every time they select new materials for their library. Right-wing political viewpoints are severely underrepresented in public school classrooms - is this "book banning?" It has the identical effect.

The fact is, both "hard book banning" and "soft book banning" is actively practiced by the left in public school systems across the nation. Classic books such as Huckleberry Finn and To Kill A Mockingbird have been banned because they contain certain words which might make "racial minorities" feel uncomfortable.

In conclusion, schools have an absolute moral right to "ban books" if they go against the values that parents are attempting to instill in their children. In fact, it is a duty. Failure to adequately regulate the material that they expose children to is simply child abuse and a violation of the (misguided) trust that parents place in the school system.

School systems must ban religiously blasphemous, gratuitously violent, or sexually explicit books from their libraries and classrooms immediately. Some may object to this proposal due to the possibility of legal challenges. However, the court system, including the Supreme Court, is not the Supreme Leader - they do not have absolute authority to decide what is right or wrong. There is a moral and constitutional duty to resist immoral or unlawful judgements by a higher authority - called the Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrates. Judicial supremacy is a fiction. Local authorities, such as school boards, have the right and responsibility to support families and their values, not undermine them.


  1. Looks like the Horseshoe Theory is right again, no matter how much it is derided. The AltRight wants to ban books just like Nazis, communists, and SJWs. You are no different than the SJWs who scream for censorship when an opinion offends them.


Post a Comment

Comments containing spam, promotion of violence, or obscenity will be removed.