It has become abundantly clear to anyone paying attention that the Iowa Library Association, Sara Parris, and their comrades, are the polar opposite of free speech warriors. Sunlight, it is said, is the best disinfectant. Their behavior when exposed to light shows them for what they are: the most zealous censors around.
Earlier this year, I had an unexpected opportunity to speak with Julie Finch, president of the ILA, about library content. She rattled off all about her expertise. To hear her tell it, she was the most knowledgeable person in the state when it came to libraries. Laypeople should recognize the expertise of professional library staff. Butt out, they know what they’re doing, was the implication. Through her blue mask, she told me that in her view, a library should have all points of view and that everyone should find “at least one thing in the library that pisses them off”. I asked why libraries, such as the one in Ames, seem to be promoting a certain viewpoint to the exclusion of others. There just isn’t enough money to buy every book — it’s a funding problem, she told me. I then asked about people who had offered to donate books, whose offers were rejected. Her excuse then changed to a problem of space.
Next, I asked who decides which books to buy. It’s all locally decided, she told me. I would have to ask the local people because Expert Finch had no idea how they chose the books. If that is the case, I asked, why do libraries all across Iowa seem to buy and feature the exact same books? At this point, Julie Finch, ILA President and Library Expert, disappeared and was replaced in the blink of an eye with Julie Finch, Layperson. By the end of our brief conversation, I was expecting her to tell me she didn’t even know what a library was.
It is clear that she has taken ALA President Drabinski’s statement that “libraries should be sites for socialist organizing” seriously.
Like Finch, when it comes to “Comprehensive Sex Education”, proponents say children need this as part of the curriculum, because what do parents know about sex? Then, when there’s a legal requirement to make the materials age-appropriate, they feign ignorance and claim not to know anything about sex. They say they can’t interpret the law, even though, as The Iowa Standard has pointed out, the law is clear to anyone with a reading comprehension score greater than approximately zero. The truth of the matter is that they don’t believe there is such a thing as an age-inappropriate book. You don’t need to take my word for it: read the academic papers of Queer Theorists — yes, that’s a real academic field!
When Parris and her comrades say they are against book bans, they are lying. They want to promote books that tell children they were born in the wrong body to funnel them into the school-to-surgery pipeline. They want to have creepy conversations with kids about sex and keep it secret from parents. They want to ban any books that challenge their creepy ideas, like Johnny the Walrus, and when they ban, they want the books completely out of print, unavailable for anyone to buy. That’s far different than wanting books in schools and libraries to be age-appropriate.
Some things shouldn’t be given to children. If we use the same reasoning that calls keeping age-inappropriate books out of schools “book banning”, that would make keeping alcohol out of schools “prohibition” or “a new temperance movement.” That’s how intellectually vacuous the “book ban” claims are.
The ILA, Parris, and their far-left comrades aren’t free speech advocates. This must be pointed out to everyone at every opportunity. Censorious Sara is fully in favor of censorship — so long as she is the censor.
- Chris Campbell
Ames
Well said