The Maryland House and Senate both passed the Freedom to Read Act as an "Emergency Bill" and now sits on the Governor's desk waiting to be signed. Only there are some major problems with the flawed bill that was ramrodded through by extremist liberal legislators. The Freedom to Read Act has nothing to do with the freedom to read. It should be called the "Freedom for Children to Read Obscenity Act." Legislators were so focused on the pedophilia prize that they overlooked some legalities and working parts that will most certainly backfire on the State of Maryland if the bill is signed by the Governor or not vetoed by him.
The complete Freedom to Read Act can be downloaded here.
Why did legislators submit the Freedom to Read Act as an Emergency Bill?
Parents and citizens from all across the state and country have expressed their objection to school media centers having obscene material that describes and depicts the acts of oral, vaginal, anal intercourse, orgies, sex toys, and bestiality (sex with animals).
With a liberal agenda to sexually groom children under the guise of diversity, equity, and inclusion, the state along with the ALA, MSLA, NEA, MSEA, and other activist organizations push a false narrative that parents and citizens are out to ban books, and especially those that are LGBTQ themed or written by people of color. There's nothing further from the truth. Obscenity is obscenity, no matter straight, gay, or with animals. All of these obscenities exist in public schools. The liberals also think that books by non-white authors are to be an exception when providing obscenity to minors. How absurd is that? When desperate, break glass.
There's nobody we know that wants to ban books. The majority of parents and citizens from all political spectrums are against having obscene materials in school media centers, which are not public libraries but a resource extension of the classroom. People are free to read anything in the public library, and nobody is blocking the entryway.
Wanting to blur the lines, liberals want to make a school media center one in the same as a public library. Conservative citizens (straight and gay), have written legislators, shown up at school board meetings, written letters to request the removal of obscene materials, and even filed lawsuits.
But the state can't have that. It's an EMERGENCY.
Remember when COVID-19 came along and we saw emergency bills emerge? This was the first time people heard of such a thing, and it was really a test of power to see if legislators could force citizens without due process or having a say. "You'll shut up and comply, as this is what we say is best for you." Not only did this result in several mandates that turned out to be scientifically unnecessary, but also taught legislators a new kind of political weapon to pull out when they want to force opposing citizens to comply with their agenda.
The Freedom to Read Act has nothing to do with one's freedom or right to read.
At the same time as the HB785 Freedom to Read Act was submitted in the House, HB25 was also submitted, titled: Public Schools - Sexually Explicit Materials - Prohibited in Libraries and Media Centers. While HB785 advanced, the liberals blocked HB25 from advancing as you can see below:
If the intention of the Freedom to Read Act was really about the freedom to read and not about providing obscene materials to minors, then HB25 would have passed in both the House and Senate with respect to both. Instead, they worked to block HB25 as it was a threat to their agenda.
The Freedom to Read Act (FTRA) has several legal issues, oversights, and loopholes.
FTRA encroaches on local authority. The FTRA was designed to undermine local control of county school boards so that school media centers and libraries would be centrally controlled by the state. In the first paragraph of the FTRA, it ironically threatens the freedom to read should counties not comply. That's right, counties are threatened using the State Comptroller to withhold funding from media centers/libraries if they do not comply.
FTRA is unconstitutional, as it violates the Equal Protection Clause. The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Article 1 reads: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Therefore, each U.S. citizen is to have equal protecton under the law.
The FTRA states: A COUNTY BOARD MAY NOT DISMISS, DEMOTE, SUSPEND, DISCIPLINE, REASSIGN, TRANSFER, OR OTHERWISE RETALIATE AGAINST A LIBRARIAN OR, A CERTIFIED LIBRARY MEDIA SPECIALIST, OR SCHOOL LIBRARY MEDIA PROGRAM SUPPORT STAFF EMPLOYED BY A COUNTY BOARD MAY NOT BE DISMISSED, DEMOTED, SUSPENDED, DISCIPLINED, REASSIGNED, TRANSFERRED, OR OTHERWISE RETALIATED AGAINST FOR ACTING IN A MANNER FOR PERFORMING THEIR JOB DUTIES CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE STANDARDS FOR LIBRARIES DESCRIBED UNDER SUBSECTION OF THIS SECTION.
Maryland is a "Employment At-Will" state. This means that an employee may be hired or fired for almost any reason -- whether fair or not -- or for no reason at all. The FTRA provides immunity, special protections, and job securities for librarians. This is unconstitutional, as this Act would be providing privileged protections and immunity that other citizens are not afforded under the law. This violates the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution and establishes a system of inequity.
The FTRA unconstitutionally excludes resident taxpayers from government. Page 3 of the FTRA states that objections to materials in a school can only be made by a student, parent, guardian, or school personnel. They've excluded resident taxpayers of a county. That's unconstitutional as the Maryland Constitution - Declaration of Rights states:
Article 1. That all Government of right originates from the People, is founded in compact only, and instituted solely for the good of the whole; and they have, at all times, the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their Form of Government in such manner as they may deem expedient.
Art. 4. That the People of this State have the sole and exclusive right of regulating the internal government and police thereof, as a free, sovereign and independent State.
Art. 6. That all persons invested with the Legislative or Executive powers of Government are the Trustees of the Public, and, as such, accountable for their conduct: Wherefore, whenever the ends of Government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the People may, and of right ought, to reform the old, or establish a new Government; the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
The FTRA mentions "State Standards For Libraries" that legislators failed to define. The bill mentions "State Standards for Libraries" and nobody knows what that actually means.
Does the American Library Association get to determine these standards? Legislators deceitfully left these standards loose-ended so that after the FTRA passes, they can dynamically change the conditions or rules at any time to without due process.
The intent of the FTRA fails to accomplish its objective. Let's take a look at the language.
(1) THE MATERIALS, SERVICES, AND RESOURCES PROVIDED IN A SCHOOL LIBRARY MEDIA PROGRAM ARE PROVIDED FOR THE INTEREST, INFORMATION, AND INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT OF STUDENTS AND SCHOOL PERSONNEL OF THE SCHOOLS THE PROGRAM SERVES;
(2) MATERIALS MAY NOT BE EXCLUDED FROM A SCHOOL LIBRARY MEDIA PROGRAM SOLELY BECAUSE OF THE ORIGIN, BACKGROUND, OR VIEWS OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO CREATED THE MATERIAL;
(3) MATERIALS MAY NOT BE EXCLUDED OR REMOVED FROM THE CATALOGUE OF A SCHOOL LIBRARY MEDIA PROGRAM BECAUSE OF PARTISAN, IDEOLOGICAL, OR RELIGIOUS DISAPPROVAL;
(4) THE RIGHT TO USE A SCHOOL LIBRARY BELONGS TO ALL STUDENTS AND SCHOOL PERSONNEL SERVED BY THE LIBRARY AND THAT RIGHT SHOULD NOT BE DENIED OR HINDERED BECAUSE OF AN INDIVIDUAL’S ORIGIN, BACKGROUND, OR VIEWS;
Obscenity has nothing to do with INTEREST, INFORMATION, AND INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT, ORIGIN, BACKGROUND, VIEWS, OR PARTISAN, IDEOLOGICAL, OR RELIGIOUS DISAPPROVAL. The curious INTEREST of a child under 18 makes no exceptions for adults to provide obscene material to minors under our existing obscenity laws (Maryland State Criminal Law Code Annotated §11-201, § 11-202, § 11-203) and federal).
Legislators realize that they cannot override existing obscenity laws, so they have to be crafty. That's why they didn't specifically addresses obscenity or sex in the FTRA, but wanted to imply it using other words and obstacles such as librarian immunity. They hope to either dupe or bully weak school boards into compliance, or provide a meaningless bill for liberal school boards to hide behind. A school board can absolutely exclude and remove obscene materials if they write a policy and provide a uniform process to address it.
As a ridiculous side note, the FTRA works to establish more rights for authors than the reading citizens of the state, while offering a guarantee to purchase an author's book with its inclusion clause of "not to exclude." This clearly places a priority on lobby, union, publisher, activist organizations, and association interests before the people. Obscenity and author entitlement for schools to purchase their book is not protected under the First Amendment.
The Good News. The FTRA now opens the door to stock school media centers with the Holy Bible, including positive, enlightening, and encouraging Christian-themed books that demonstrate morality and values. They must offer equitable access to children, teens, and adults, regardless of ORIGIN, BACKGROUND, VIEWS, OR PARTISAN, IDEOLOGICAL, OR RELIGIOUS DISAPPROVAL.
Yeah, but what about separation of church and state?
If someone were to ask this question, they don't understand "separation of church and state." This term is derived from the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
Maryland Constitution, Article 36: Nothing shall prohibit or require the making reference to belief in, reliance upon, or invoking the aid of God or a Supreme Being in any governmental or public document, proceeding, activity, ceremony, school, institution, or place.
Separation of church and state was a protection designed to stop government intervention with the church, but not church intervention with the government. It's a one-way street. It's not two-way, that is so often twisted to escape accountability. As result of the FTRA, Christian books must now be included in the way that it's written.
Of the things we see in both government and in our schools, there are many masked agendas that are molded into a form of what appears to be sensibly reasonable, but mean something entirely different under the surface. The Freedom to Read Act clearly has nothing to do with the freedom to read. It's about power and control to advance a totalitarian government, lobby, and union control. The establishment is trying to unionize librarians in the State of Maryland (HB65), which means more money, power, and control to advance the political indoctrination of our children. The palms of the legislators have been greased.
The counties and their school boards must legally push back against the state for their overreach should the governor sign it. Maryland legislators have given us nothing by title, as everyone already has the freedom to read.
Fellows & Editors
April 11, 2024
Copyright DelmarvaPTC.org. Please consider subscribing to the Delmarva Parent Teacher Coalition and follow us on FaceBook to stay informed of what's really happening with education in our schools.
All copyright © information provided at no charge and strictly for educational purposes under the Fair Use Act.
Comentários