© Reuters. People take part in a protest against Moms for Liberty outside the Museum of the American Revolution in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, June 9, 2023. REUTERS/Hannah Pierre
2/5
Written by Jonathan Allen and Hannah Pierre
DOYLESTOWN, Pennsylvania (Reuters) – On May 12, the library coordinator at Central Bucks School in Pennsylvania sent an email to colleagues that some conservative parents and Christian advocacy groups have long been praying to see.
The email instructed the school’s library staff to remove all copies of two books within 24 hours: “Gender Queer”, an illustrated memoir by Maya Cubabe that includes cartoons about sexual encounters; and “This Gay Book” by Jono Dawson, a how-to guide with illustrations aimed at gay students who feel left out by standard sex education curricula.
They were removed under a new book challenge policy enacted last July by the Republican majority in the school district board after a grueling series of public meetings that divided the affluent North Philadelphia district. Under this policy, a parent can challenge a book in a school library if it depicts implied or actual nudity or “sexual acts,” and then have a panel of district staff review it.
The withdrawal of the two books, both hated by conservatives across the country, was another local victory in a broader national effort sponsored by conservative Christian groups to expand direct parental control over what school staff can share with their children, particularly on matters of gender. identity and race. Liberal groups say the effort amounts to censorship and even bigotry, with disproportionate harm to LGBT students and those in other minorities.
Similar battles have raged across the country since the COVID-19 pandemic mask mandates and school closures have turned school boards into some of the most fiery crucibles of American political debate.
“What Bucks County has become is really this microcosm of a division that we see all over the country, where people on both sides are pretty sure they’re right,” said Tabitha DelAngelo, one of the three Democrats on the school board. who voted against this policy.
According to two people involved in drafting Policy 109.2, it was written with advice and legal counsel from Christian nonprofits allied with the influential national group, the Family Research Council, which advocates for religious freedom and LGBTQ rights.
Dana Hunter, a Republican and chair of the school board, said she sought advice from Jeremy Samic, a senior counselor at the Center for Legal Independence and the Penn Family Institute. Because SAMC Groups provided legal counsel on Policy 109.2 on a pro bono basis, Hunter said, she is under no obligation to inform other board members that she is working with him.
Two of the board members said they and the other Democrat on the board were unaware of the extent of these groups’ involvement until Reuters informed them.
Video of the board meeting shows that when Dell’Angelo repeatedly asked who wrote the book policy before voting, the Republican members refused to say so. Republicans have a six-to-three majority on the board.
A few months after policy 109.2 was passed, House Republicans passed another policy in January that requires teachers to appear impartial on “questions of partisan, political, or social policy.” She took note and expanded on an earlier instruction from the district headmaster that teachers take down any rainbow pride flags displayed in classrooms, saying they had become “a flashpoint for controversy and division.”
Hunter and Smick said they worked together on that policy, too.
literary merit
A loose network of local conservative parents were outspoken advocates of the book challenge policy at monthly school board meetings, standing at a microphone during public comment to read aloud sexually explicit passages from books they objected to.
The first draft of the policy, which was written in early 2022 by district library staff, similar to guidelines from the American Association of School Librarians, stated that staff should consider a book’s “literary merit” when deciding to acquire or keep it.
A rewritten policy passed in July removed the “literary merit” requirement, and allowed parents to seek removal of books from district school libraries if they contain actual or implied depictions of “sexual acts” or nudity.
“It’s a very reasonable policy,” said Chairman Hunter.
The book challenge policy has become part of a broader complaint filed by families of LGBT students in Central Bucks about a “hostile educational environment,” which the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania has put together. The complaint sparked an investigation by the US Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. The county has spent about $1 million in legal fees to defend itself, according to board members.
In an interview, Samic of the Pennsylvania Family Institute said his work included making sure the policies were “point-neutral” in order to comply with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
“There are things that everyone, including the ACLU, agrees you shouldn’t give to kids,” said Samek, who doesn’t live in the school district.
The Pennsylvania Family Institute is listed by the Family Research Council as one of the 49 “State Family Policy Councils”. The groups are all part of a national network of Christian groups that oppose abortion, same-sex marriage, and gender-affirming Medicare for transgender people.
Hunter said she was unaware of these situations, but believes they are unrelated.
“What does this attitude have to do with age-appropriate materials for libraries? It’s not,” she said.
In November, Samek shared with Hunter and District Administrator a draft policy that would bar trans students from playing on school sports teams of a gender other than the one they were assigned to at birth, according to emails obtained under Pennsylvania’s Freedom of Information Act. The policy proposal has not been submitted to the Board in its entirety.
It’s wrong to include groups that oppose LGBT rights in public school policy, said DelAngelo, one of the Democratic board members, and immoral to do so in secret.
“I totally understand why people are upset,” she said. “They say ‘We’re not against gay kids,’ but then you ask this group for advice? It’s a mismatch. Now you’re telling yourself. Now we see how you really think.”
Parents, teachers, and students who opposed efforts to challenge the books said excerpts read aloud at board meetings were taken out of context, ignoring the books’ larger values.
“Some books have images of sex, but I think that’s just an accurate portrayal of teens and adults,” said Leo Burchill, an 18-year-old transgender student who graduated this month from an area high school. “Banning those books that talk about sex, nudity, or rape won’t stop it from happening.”
Earlier this year, Shannon Harris, a mother of two from the district, and another parent filed appeals with the district over about 60 books they deemed to contain inappropriate sexual content. A third of the books contain LGBTQ characters or themes while two-thirds do not, which Harris said belies the antagonists’ “false narrative” about the homophobia or transphobia behind the policy. These books are pending review.
Besides the two books removed in May, three other books, including two with LGBT themes, have been reviewed by district staff committees, who have voted to keep them on the high school library shelves.
She said Harris’ invitation cost her many friends, but she had no regrets.
She said, “I’m a Christian, and what I believe in is that what I should do is stand up for the good of everyone, because that’s what God wants.”