Issue


Standards for Explicit Sexual Content in Schools

 KEY POINTS

  • School Boards are legally permitted to create policy setting standards for preventing age-inappropriate sexually explicit content in their curriculum and library.
  • The standard ought not be: “As long as this book doesn’t land us in jail for giving it to a minor, the sexually explicit content is welcome in our curriculum or the school library.”
  • Written policy protects students, parents, employees, and the school
    and ensures better educational content will fill the finite space in curriculum and in libraries.
  • Schools should prioritize material that provides rich educational value over material that may provide similar value but also has age-inappropriate sexually explicit content.
  • Age-Appropriate policies are not directed at viewpoint and are not banning the book from student possession. They are exercising the schools prerogative to determine what to include in its own library and curriculum.

Standards for Sexually Explicit Content in Schools

Schools must engage in line-drawing for age appropriateness of sexually explicit content in their library and curriculum. Criminal laws are one required line prohibiting schools from giving materials to minors in curriculum or library that a court deems pornographic or obscene. But what about sexually explicit content that does not rise to the extremely high bar of criminal law?

School boards are legally permitted to articulate standards that go beyond “would we land in jail for giving this book to a minor?” to prevent other age-inappropriate sexually explicit content in their curriculum and school library. Unfortunately, many schools have no policy standards for sexually explicit material beyond criminal law.

Schools with written age-appropriate standards for sexually explicit materials that differ for elementary, middle, and high schools protect students and ensures better educational content will fill the finite space in curriculum and in libraries.

But such written policies also protect the school’s staff and district from costly litigation. Even without written policy, a school librarian, principal, or school board is permitted to remove a particular title they deem age-inappropriate sexually explicit material. But with written policy standards, the school is less susceptible to baseless allegations that the title was removed for an impermissible viewpoint discriminatory reason.

School employees still have wide discretion to select and purchase books that comport with the age-appropriate standards in written policy set by the school board, and from that universe of materials, parents then have ultimate authority to make additional age-appropriate determinations for their own child and should have authority to restrict certain titles for their own child.

Individuals who desire to see sexually explicit materials in the hands of minors sometimes argue that such policies are “book bans.” Attempts at labeling common-sense school standards as “book bans” have been rejected by courts, most recently in August of 2022 by a federal court in Missouri.

A parent, for example, who wants to buy sexually explicit books for their own child to read are not prevented from doing so by such school policies. School policies setting forth its own age-appropriate standards for sexually explicit content in its own curriculum and school library do not even prohibit a student from bringing their own book to school or from reading it in an appropriate time, such as study hall. But school districts do not have to put such explicit books in their own curriculum or in the school library, and such a decision by the school is not a ban on books.

Such policies treat inappropriate sexually explicit content the same regardless of whether the sexually explicit depictions or descriptions happen to be between straight, gay, or even a lone person. As such the argument made by those who desire to see sexually explicit materials in the hands of minors, that these policies are directed at LGBT people, is false.

Too many schools lack baseline standards regarding sexually explicit content in school libraries. Schools ought to spend the finite time in the day on academic excellence, and sexually explicit content detracts from that. Explicit sexual depictions and descriptions may sell, but refusal to purchase it is no ban. Districts can decide not to buy and stock sexually explicit content. If you are a school board member who desires to implement such a policy, we are glad to assist you.

Related Articles

On Marriage, Pitts and Corbett Raze Kane

Pennsylvania makes national headlines: From Family Research Council: Either the President's lawlessness is rubbing off -- or some state officials have forgotten how to read. Nothing else seems to explain the decision by Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane, who...

read more

Corbett Champions Marriage – Tell Him Thank You!

Pennsylvania Governor defending marriage against ACLU lawsuit and Montgomery County's unlawful actions (Harrisburg, PA) - Two recent attacks to marriage in Pennsylvania are being defending courageously by Governor Tom Corbett. Gov. Corbett announced that the State...

read more

State Sues to Stop Rogue Montgomery County Official

AP: Pennsylvania officials are asking a court to stop a rogue county from issuing marriage licenses to gay couples. The state Health Department filed a lawsuit Tuesday in Commonwealth Court against D. Bruce Hanes. He oversees the granting of marriage licenses in...

read more

Majority of Americans Believe in Religious Freedom

From our friends at Family Research Council: When did it become acceptable to sacrifice the freedoms of conscience and free exercise of religion on the same-sex "wedding" altar? Never, if you ask most Americans. In a stunningly lopsided poll, U.S. voters universally...

read more
Defend marriage, for the kids’ sake

Defend marriage, for the kids’ sake

(The following is an op-ed that was published in The Patriot News)  By Brandon McGinley Single parenthood is on the rise. Fatherlessness, in particular, abounds. Out-of-wedlock childbearing occurs at levels that previous generations of reformers, such as...

read more

Contact Kane: “Do Your Job!”

Pennsylvania law states that: “It shall be the duty of the Attorney General to uphold and defend the constitutionality of all statutes so as to prevent their suspension or abrogation…” Click here to send Attorney General Kane a message of your disappointment at her...

read more

AG Won’t Defend: People of PA Deserve Better

Click here to send AG Kane an email: "Do Your Job!" (Harrisburg, PA) - The Pennsylvania Family Institute today expressed disappointment that Attorney General Kathleen Kane will not to defend the Commonwealth’s marriage law against a lawsuit filed this week by the...

read more

Reaction to ACLU Challenge to Marriage in PA

By: Dan Bartkowiak I just came from the Capitol in Harrisburg. A press conference was held this morning to announce a new court challenge aiming to redefine marriage for every Pennsylvanian. It is a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Pennsylvania's...

read more