With the passage of House Bill 2789, Illinois has adopted the “American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights that indicates materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.” In short, any library that refuses to make pornographic materials available to children will lose state funding.
As more and more parents and communities have begun paying attention to the “grooming” nature of LGBTQ books and other materials available to minors in school and public libraries, many of those parents and communities have pushed back against such grooming. In fact in towns, cities, counties, and states across America, policies, ordinances, and laws are being passed to protect children. But in contrast to good pushing back in those places, evil appears to be pushing forward in other places. And Illinois — famous for liberal policies that seem to constantly bring cities such as Chicago to the brink of the abyss — is perhaps the most determined place so far.
As LifeSiteNews reports:
While other states work to remove pornographic content from public schools and children’s library access, Illinois is moving in the opposite direction, with a new law that will penalize schools for not allowing children unfettered access to such material.
HB 2789 “adopt[s] the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights that indicates materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval or, in the alternative, develop a written statement declaring the inherent authority of the library or library system to” assemble a diverse collection of material and “prohibit the practice of banning specific books or resources.”
Any library or library system that fails to adopt the ALA bill of rights or adopt an equivalent policy against the removal of materials will be ineligible for state grants under the bill, which has cleared both chambers of the Illinois legislature and is expected to be signed into law by Democrat Gov. J.B. Pritzker.
With the recent barrage of books for children and teens filled with sexual content (much of it homosexual in nature and happening between underage characters), there is little denying that there is an agenda at play. That agenda seems clear: the sexualization of children at younger and younger ages. Books that would have actually been illegal less than a generation ago are now found in the juvenile section in public libraries and in public school libraries.
At the same time that liberals are scrambling to remove any book that isn’t “woke” enough where race, inclusivity, gender ideology, and a slate of other woke buzz-words and phrases are concerned, those same liberals rend their garments and gnash their teeth when anyone dares to suggest that children don’t need to have access to books portraying the cross-dressing, homosexual antics of teen characters. And it appears that at least some of those liberals want to codify into law the “right” of perverts to groom children via the printing press and publishing house.
But even in that, they aren’t honest about their motives or their methods.
HB 2789 is veiled behind a paper-thin veneer of “protecting kids from partisan nonsense.” The bill carries the short description of “LIBRARY SYSTEMS-BOOK BANNING” — because when you hear “book banning,” you are supposed to clutch your chest in shocked disbelief that anyone would ban a book in the enlightened year of 2023. And that would almost work, if it weren’t for the fact that no one is “banning” books even though some books deserve to be banned. Further, the bill’s description hints at its intent, stating that the bill:
Provides that it is the policy of the State to encourage the improvement of free public libraries and to encourage cooperation among all types of libraries in promoting the sharing of library resources, including digital resources, and to encourage and protect the freedom of public libraries and library systems to acquire materials without external limitation and to be protected against attempts to ban, remove, or otherwise restrict access to books or other materials. Provides that the State Librarian shall prescribe rules concerning the development of a written policy declaring the inherent authority of the public library or library system to prohibit the practice of banning specific books or resources. Provides that, in order to be eligible for State grants, a public library or library system shall develop a written policy prohibiting the practice of banning books within the public library or library system. Makes other changes.
The first sticky issue here is the “freedom of public libraries and library systems to acquire materials without external limitation.” Surely, the bill’s proponents do not mean that libraries and library systems should have the “freedom” to carry children’s books espousing racism. Imagine if the KKK published a series of children’s books introducing ideas of racial purity and the superiority of the white race. Would Illinois Democrats decry libraries removing those books? Of course such books should be excluded from school and public libraries — and from polite society, for that matter.
But if that isn’t what the bill’s authors and sponsors mean, what do they mean? The bill’s full text answers that in unambiguous language, stating that the “State Librarian and the Illinois State Library staff shall administer the provisions of this Act and shall prescribe such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry the provisions of this Act into effect,” and that the “rules and regulations established by the State Librarian for the administration of this Act shall be designed to achieve” a list of “standards and objectives.” Among those “standards and objectives” is the following:
Adopt the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights that indicates materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval or, in the alternative, develop a written statement declaring the inherent authority of the library or library system to provide an adequate collection of books and other materials sufficient in size and varied in kind and subject matter to satisfy the library needs of the people of this state and prohibit the practice of banning specific books or resources.
The bill makes it clear that “In order to be eligible for State grants, a library or library system shall adopt the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights, so an understanding of that Bill of Rights is important to an understanding of this bill. As LifeSiteNews explains:
The ALA’s Library Bill of Rights declares that books and other materials in libraries “should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation” or “because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval” and that a “person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.”
A note at the bottom of the page acknowledges that “questions do arise concerning application of these principles to specific library practices.” The ALA’s statement on how these principles apply to minors’ access to materials indicates that the group, and by extension any facility that formally adopts its standards, does not allow for any age-based restrictions on access to certain content.
“Equitable access to all library resources and services should not be abridged based on chronological age, apparent maturity, educational level, literacy skills, legal status, or through restrictive scheduling and use policies,” the group says, and concerns about that access should be handled exclusively by how parents “advise” their own children. “Libraries and library governing bodies should not use rating systems to inhibit a minor’s access to materials.”
So, there’s the rub. Parents should “advise” their children, but the library is not bound by that “advice.” Mom and Dad don’t want Johnny to read gay porn, so they forbid him to do so. But, according to the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights, that is merely advice and the library should provide Johnny access to books depicting gay sex between teens anyway. By that same token, Sally should have access to lesbian erotica or how-to books on “transitioning” to a boy, her parents’ “advice” be damned.
Make no mistake: This bill is aimed at parents who are seeking to rein in the power of those who would pervert their children. The LifeSiteNews article linked above includes Twitter videos showing parents upset about Illinois libraries that promoted transgenderism and perverted sex acts for children.
Those videos were from last year, and this bill is the Illinois Legislature’s answer to parents who demanded change. The answer is clear: The Illinois Legislature thinks parents should shut up, sit down, and let the perverts groom their kids. And while this is happening in Illinois, things like this tend to spread. Legalized protection of child grooming may be coming soon to a library system near you.
