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
Sponsorships Available for Nov. 4th Evening with Lila Rose in Lancaster!
2011 Friends of the Family Banquet -- in Lancaster, PA Friday, November 4, 2011 Lancaster Host Resort 2300 Lincoln Highway East (Route 30) Lancaster, PA Keynote speaker, Lila Rose, is founder of Live Action Films, and has gone undercover to expose the seedy side of...
Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Edges Out Christian Adoption Agency
The Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) informed the Evangelical Child and Family Agency (ECFA) — a 61-year-old group that has been contracting with the state to place foster children in homes since 1965 — that its contract will not be renewed...
NC Voters Get Chance to Vote on Marriage
The North Carolina Senate followed the lead of the state House and approved a proposed state constitutional amendment defining marriage only as one man and one woman. North Carolina voters will decide whether to add the proposed amendment to the state constitution in...
Canada Judge: Infanticide Allowed
Pro-life advocates have been speaking out about the importance of life for over 30 years. We've been warning that a society that does not value the life of the unborn will soon not value the life of those who are born. Now, sadly, we have a case in point: An Alberta...
President Obama Goes After Pro-Life Sidewalk Counselors
NPR reports, Obama is deciding to crack down on those protesting, conducting sidewalk counseling, or even praying for the mothers and their babies. None of this is surprising. This President, as a State Senator, voted against a bill requiring doctors to care for...
Budget Crunch – Most PA Teachers Refused Pay Freeze
Teachers in nearly four out of five districts ignored Gov. Tom Corbett’s request for a voluntary pay freeze. Governor Corbett's reaction: “You see a lot of teachers that were laid off in districts that refused to take a wage freeze, and the parents and citizens, the...
Does New Poll Reflect Reality in Pennsylvania?
According to a Franklin & Marshall College poll, a third, 33 percent, strongly favor a constitutional amendment that would allow homosexual couples to get married, and about another sixth, 17 percent, said they would somewhat favor a constitutional amendment to...
The Chilling of Our First Amendment Rights
An absolute MUST read by Maggie Gallagher. Chilling indeed. (First published on National Review Online) The Chilling of Our First Amendment Rights - By Maggie Gallagher - The Corner - National Review Online.
