Connect with us

Politics

Opinion: Need help finding a good book? Try one your 9th grader isn't allowed to read

Published

on

Opinion: Need help finding a good book? Try one your 9th grader isn't allowed to read

I have discovered many wonderful books, mostly in the young adult category, by reading news stories about what’s being banned in public schools these days: “Gender Queer,” the riveting, upsetting graphic novel about the nonbinary author’s journey of self-discovery; “Dear Martin,” in which a Black teenager who is wrongfully arrested while trying to help his drunk ex-girlfriend get home writes an imaginary letter to Martin Luther King Jr.; and “Paradise Lost,” John Milton’s 17th century epic poem about the fall of Adam and Eve.

Wait, what?

Not joking.

Opinion Columnist

Robin Abcarian

Advertisement

At the end of last year, according to the Orlando Sentinel, “Paradise Lost” was one of 673 titles removed from public school classroom shelves in an Orlando-area district in response to new state laws that require librarians and teachers to review all classroom books and banish ones that are pornographic or depict “sexual conduct.”

As the Sentinel explained, “New state training … warns them to ‘err on the side of caution’ when approving books and warns that they can face criminal penalties and the loss of their teaching certificates if they approve inappropriate books.”

Florida’s censorship efforts are part of a book-banning frenzy sweeping through the more conservative parts of our allegedly free-speech-loving country.

Advertisement

“We have recorded instances of book bans in 30 states,” said Kasey Meehan, the Freedom to Read director at PEN America, which advocates for free expression and fights censorship. “Florida and Texas are leading the way, as well as Missouri, Pennsylvania, Iowa and Utah,” she said.

In Idaho, librarians are so demoralized by the censorious political climate — one official in the city of Buhl referred to the local librarian as a “groomer” — that more than half recently told the state’s library association that they are thinking of leaving the field, according to the Idaho Capital Sun.

Mostly, the pressure to censor is coming from the right, which has pushed book bans under the banner of “parental rights.” Efforts originating from the left, Meehan told me, often involve protests against white authors using the N-word. In 2020, the Burbank Unified School District took some books off required reading lists, such as Harper Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird” and Mark Twain’s “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,” after parents complained that the books were racist. However, Burbank Supt. John Paramo told me Tuesday that they are still available in the school and classroom libraries.

Books targeted by conservatives often feature characters who are not white, or who are not heterosexual.

In January 2022, a North Carolina parent asked his school district to take “Dear Martin” off the required reading list in his son’s high school English class. Tim Reeves told a local TV news station that he did not object to the novel’s message about racial profiling, per se. Rather, he objected to the liberal use of vulgar words. “Words that start with the letter S,” as he put it. “Words that start with the letter F.”

Advertisement

“Dr. Martin Luther King would not want vulgarity or sexual innuendos [to] be used to teach the lesson about racism and brutality,” said Reeves. I don’t know about that. Seems like King would maybe have been more interested in ending racial profiling than worrying about how fictional kids talk.

Anyway, thanks to Reeves, I downloaded “Dear Martin,” the widely acclaimed debut novel by Nic Stone, a Black woman whose father is a police officer. The book was inspired by the same events that inspired the Black Lives Matter movement — police killings of unarmed Black men and women. “I wondered: what would Dr. King say or do if he were living in our present social climate?” wrote Stone in her author’s note.

Thanks to the magic of my search function, I detected 10 F-words, 39 S-words, 30 “damns” and three “goddamns” in the text of “Dear Martin.”

As someone who is raising a teenager, that sounded about right to me. You should hear how the kids talk when they think no adult is near.

You might think book bans are beneficial to a young author. Hey, all publicity is good publicity, right? But this is not the case, said Meehan.

Advertisement

“When their works are banned,” she told me, “it can have a sizable impact on their revenue. Those authors are less likely to get invited for a school visit or a public library reading or a Zoom classroom visit. Those are revenue generators that kid-lit authors rely on.”

If you are a famous author, like Ann Patchett, or perhaps a dead one, like Milton, a ban might not hurt at all. It might even help.

When Patchett learned this month, for example, that two of her books had been banned in Orange County, Fla., she trolled the censors on Instagram:

“It’s a pretty big day for me personally,” said Patchett. “My first novel, “Patron Saint of Liars,” is about a home for unwed mothers in rural Kentucky. … They have the baby and give the baby up for adoption, just like they tell us to do in the state of Florida. I would actually think this book would be required reading.” (Her other banned novel, “Bel Canto,” features a hostage-taking and ends with the terrorists being killed. With guns. “Maybe in the state of Florida that would be OK too, because they don’t ban guns,” Patchett suggested.)

It’s not just sexual, gender and racial themes that incense some on the right, Meehan said. Parents have also banned books that include scenes of violence (Frank Herbert’s sci-fi classic “Dune”), sexual abuse (Margaret Atwood’s “The Handmaid’s Tale”), drug use (Stephen Chbosky’s “The Perks of Being a Wallflower”) or suicide (Jay Asher’s “Thirteen Reasons Why”).

Advertisement

“It’s content that makes people feel uncomfortable,” said Meehan. “But isn’t that the beauty of books?”

It is.

Just think how much discomfort — and enlightenment — “Paradise Lost’s” most famous line, uttered by that great fictional character Satan, delivers: “Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven.”

@robinkabcarian

Advertisement

Politics

Tom Emmer blasts Democrats’ double standard on SAVE Act: ‘They require photo IDs’ at their own DNC

Published

on

Tom Emmer blasts Democrats’ double standard on SAVE Act: ‘They require photo IDs’ at their own DNC

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

EXCLUSIVE: House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., is accusing Democrats of being hypocritical in their opposition to Republicans’ latest election integrity bill.

The No. 3 House Republican ripped the rival party after nearly all of them voted against the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE America) Act last week, specifically over its provision mandating federally accepted photo identification at the polls. It’s also sometimes referred to as the “SAVE Act.”

“These guys are doing the same old broken record about voter suppression,” Emmer told Fox News Digital. “Why aren’t they screaming about photo IDs at the airport? Why aren’t they screaming about photo IDs when you check out a book at the library?”

NOEM BACKS SAVE AMERICA ACT, SLAMS ‘RADICAL LEFT’ OPPOSITION TO VOTER IDS AND PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP

Advertisement

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer accused Democrats of hypocrisy for requiring photo IDs for the DNC but not supporting the SAVE America Act. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images; Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Emmer pointed out that a photo ID was required for attendees to watch former Vice President Kamala Harris accept the Democratic Party’s nomination for the White House in Chicago last year.

“By the way, if they think it’s voter suppression, why do they require photo IDs at the Democrat National Convention to get in?” Emmer said.

“I mean, I think Americans are so much smarter than these people can understand, can let themselves understand,” he said.

The SAVE America Act passed the House on Wednesday with support from all Republicans — an increasingly rare sight in the chamber — and just one Democrat, Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas.

Advertisement

A previous iteration of the bill, just called the SAVE Act, passed the House in April of last year with support from four House Democrats.

Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, talks with reporters in the Capitol after a meeting of House Democrats in Washington, June 27, 2019.  (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images)

Whereas the SAVE Act would have created a new federal proof-of-citizenship mandate in the voter registration process and imposed requirements for states to keep their rolls clear of ineligible voters, the updated bill would also require photo ID to vote in any federal election.

That photo ID would also have to denote proof-of-citizenship, according to the legislative text.

DEMOCRAT CLAIMS SAVE ACT WOULD BLOCK MARRIED WOMEN FROM VOTING; REPUBLICANS SAY THAT’S WRONG

Advertisement

Democratic leaders in the House and Senate have both panned the bill, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries calling it “voter suppression” and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., dismissing it as “a modern-day Jim Crow.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., speaks to the media next to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., at the White House in Washington, Sept. 29, 2025.  (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)

Jeffries also specifically took issue with a provision that would enable the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to initiate removal proceedings if an illegal immigrant was found on a state’s voter rolls, arguing DHS would weaponize the information.

But voter ID, at least, has proven to be a popular standard in U.S. elections across multiple public polls.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

A Pew Research Center poll released in August 2025 showed a whopping 83% of people supported government-issued photo ID requirements for showing up to vote, compared to just 16% of people who disapproved of it.

A Gallup poll from October 2024 showed 84% of people supported photo ID for voting in federal elections.

Continue Reading

Politics

Anderson Cooper will exit ’60 Minutes’ to focus on family and CNN role

Published

on

Anderson Cooper will exit ’60 Minutes’ to focus on family and CNN role

CNN anchor Anderson Cooper is walking away from his second job at “60 Minutes” in the latest sign of upheaval at the storied news magazine.

Cooper said in a statement Monday he is leaving the CBS News program because he wants to spend more time with his two young children. He joined the program in 2007 while maintaining his role as prime-time anchor at CNN.

“Being a correspondent at ’60 Minutes’ has been one of the great honors of my career,” Cooper said. “I got to tell amazing stories, and work with some of the best producers, editors and camera crews in the business. For nearly 20 years, I’ve been able to balance jobs at CNN and CBS, but I have little kids now and I want to spend as much time with them as possible, while they want to spend time with me.”

Cooper’s departure could be the first of a number of changes for “60 Minutes” as Bari Weiss, who joined CBS News as editor-in-chief last October, is expected to substantially overhaul the prestigious news magazine.

Cooper, 58, was courted for the anchor role at “CBS Evening News” last year before the network parted ways with the anchor duo of Maurice DuBois and John Dickerson. Cooper signed a new deal with CNN instead, and CBS News gave the anchor job to Tony Doukopil.

Advertisement

This is a developing story.

Continue Reading

Politics

Nancy Mace proposes bill to make aliens deportable, inadmissible for animal cruelty

Published

on

Nancy Mace proposes bill to make aliens deportable, inadmissible for animal cruelty

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina has introduced legislation that would make illegal immigrants who engage in animal cruelty inadmissible to the United States and subject to deportation.

The measure is called the “Illegal Alien Animal Abuser Removal Act of 2026.”

“If you come here illegally, you’re already a criminal. Add animal cruelty to the list and you’re on the next flight back to where you came from,” Mace said, according to a press release

NANCY MACE RIPS TRANS ATHLETE’S ATTORNEY FOR REFUSING TO DEFINE SEX AT SCOTUS WOMEN’S SPORTS HEARING

Advertisement

Nancy Mace holds a dog on Jan. 5, 2023 in Washington, D.C. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

“We have a duty to protect the voiceless from torture and abuse. Animal cruelty is a proven red flag for violence against people. These criminals escalate. Our bill makes it crystal clear: commit these sick acts and you’re deported. Immediately. No second chances,” she added.

Mace, who has served in the House since 2021, is currently running for South Carolina governor.

REP NANCY MACE SLAPS DOWN EARLY RETIREMENT RUMOR: ‘BIG FAT NO FROM ME’

Nancy Mace holds a dog as she casts her vote to adjourn in the House Chamber during the third day of elections for Speaker of the House at the U.S. Capitol Building on Jan. 5, 2023 in Washington, D.C. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Advertisement

“The message is clear: abuse animals, get deported. America will not be a sanctuary for animal abusers, especially ones who broke into our country illegally in the first place. Pack your bags,” she noted, according to the release.

Under the legislation, an alien convicted under state, tribal or local laws related to animal cruelty, abuse or animal fighting would be deemed inadmissible and deportable. The bill also specifies that convictions under certain federal animal welfare statutes would carry the same immigration consequences.

‘TR*NSGENDER ANTIFA’ EXTREMIST CHARGED WITH ATTEMPTED MURDER AFTER SKATING ON DEATH THREAT, REP MACE SAYS

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., and her dog Liberty are seen in the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, May 24, 2023. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Advertisement

The proposal further states that an alien who admits to committing acts that constitute such offenses could also be deemed inadmissible.

Continue Reading

Trending