I have already gotten e-mail challenging the article below and my stance against censorship. I have to admit the e-mail has been civil, but I do maintain that the so-called "Family-Friendly Libraries" really are unfriendly. There are things we can agree upon as a civilized society as being harmful to children, but in an effort to squash ideas all Americans end up as losers. The material that gets censored is not "pornography", but is often great works of literature. And, it is not just the "Religious Right" that is engaged in censorship. Check out the following sites that list frequently banned or censored books:
John Chadwick chadwick@unm.edu
Religious Right groups are firing their culture-war weapons at yet another cherished institution: America's public libraries. Apparently not satisfied with attempting to limit intellectual freedom in the public schools, a host of Religious Right groups, including Focus on the Family, the American Family Association, and the newly organized "Family Friendly Libraries," have sought to defame public libraries. Their efforts include attempts to persuade Americans to see their libraries, and especially the American Library Association (ALA), as a danger to children, and to organize at the local level to restrict library materials.
Focus on the Family has launched a campaign to demonize the ALA. In a recent cover story for its monthly magazine, Focus on the Family maintained ALAs freedom of access policies had turned libraries into smutty places, where children are supplied with explicit pornographic literature" and nine-year-olds are given Playboy. Its radio program, "Family News in Focus," carried a week-long series highlighting the ALAs transgressions. Mark Maddox, FOF's director of public policy, advised listeners to push the campaign to the limits. "Be bold and go as far as you can go," said Maddox. "Watch your kids and realize that they're not safe in the library anymore...."
Similarly, an American Family Association organizing letter claimed books in a public library "target children as young as 10 years old with topics such as bestiality, gang rape, sexual promiscuity, masturbation, homosexuality, incest, sodomy, etc."
While Focus on the Family crusaded against the ALA, the Family Research Council (FRC-formerly a branch of Focus on the Family) released a survey claiming that classic works of literature were systematically being removed from public libraries. The surveys introduction said, "'Classic' works of literature, as one librarian told us, do seem to be disappearing from library shelves." By implying that public libraries have lost their institutional value, FRC reassured those who might otherwise feel some discomfort attacking libraries. The report insinuated that the classics are being replaced with offensive works.
At the local level, Phil Burress, president of Cincinnati's Citizens for Community Values, teamed up with Karen Jo Gounaud, an anti-library activist from Springfield, Virginia, to form Family Friendly Libraries, a national network aimed at restricting access to books, magazines, and films it deems inappropriate. Burress describes his agenda with candor foreign to more prominent Religious Right figures. "Right to read? It's a bunch of hogwash," he says. "You don't have the right to read anything you want. We have to protect each other from dangerous material."
On October 21, representatives of these groups gathered for the first Family Friendly Libraries conference in Cincinnati, Ohio. The conference's purpose statement described its two goals--protecting "children from harmful material" and returning control of the libraries to citizens-with the familiar rhetoric of censorship. If Religious Right organizations achieve their goals, public libraries will be anything but a "friendly" place for people who don't share the Religious Right's world view.
Family Friendly Libraries has devised a "Charter for Family Friendly Library System" comprising three articles: "Traditional Family Emphasis," "Parental Library Rights," and "Respect for Standards and Laws." The first article in particular poses a threat to liberty. It reads in part, "While works discrediting and devaluing traditional family and traditional family values will not be automatically excluded from the collection of a family-friendly library, there will be no mandate to give this point of view 'equal time' space and emphasis for the sake of 'intellectual freedom' or perceived 'political correctness.' "
The charter thereby instructs public libraries either to ban materials espousing "opposing points of view"-likely to include most books about sexuality and divorce-or to offer greater numbers of materials conforming to the Religious Right's ideology. Presumably, a library would be in compliance if it either banned books with positively depicted gay characters or purchased twice as many books with negative portrayals. In an age of shrinking library budgets, most libraries, one presumes, would choose simply to censor. Family Friendly Libraries and their allies will pressure libraries to reject the ALAs Bill of Rights, which many use as a guide for protecting the right to read, in favor of its charter, which targets materials that the Religious Right believes "contribute toward ... the destruction of society." To maintain the "pro-family" bias, librarians would have to analyze every item in the library and fit books, magazines, and films into neat ideological niches. In short, the charter would turn public libraries, traditionally places of intellectual liberty and community harmony, into political battle zones.
= = end = =