Note: You'll probably have to get the free day pass from Salon in order to read this, just click the link then follow the free day pass links. It just takes like 30 seconds.
the author of a widely used environmental textbook is suing five present and former members of the Texas State Board of Education, who two years ago rejected his book because of alleged factual errors and pervasive bias. Claiming that the author's free speech and equal protection rights were violated by an act of censorship, the lawsuit asserts that the real reason the book was rejected was the author's environmentalist views, which clash with those of right-wing school-board members.
This just makes me angry - and I'd hope that it wasn't for that reason his book was being dismissed were it not for the rest of the article. However, it's pretty telling.
Note: You'll probably have to get the free day pass from Salon in order to read this, just click the link then follow the free day pass links. It just takes like 30 seconds.
the author of a widely used environmental textbook is suing five present and former members of the Texas State Board of Education, who two years ago rejected his book because of alleged factual errors and pervasive bias. Claiming that the author's free speech and equal protection rights were violated by an act of censorship, the lawsuit asserts that the real reason the book was rejected was the author's environmentalist views, which clash with those of right-wing school-board members.
This just makes me angry - and I'd hope that it wasn't for that reason his book was being dismissed were it not for the rest of the article. However, it's pretty telling.
The textbook at the center of the suit is "Environmental Science: Creating a Sustainable Future," by Daniel D. Chiras. The book, which is in its sixth edition and has been taught in many colleges and high schools in Texas and across the country for 20 years, passed the usual rigorous peer review process and had been recommended by the commissioner of education, along with two others.
However, in a last-minute hearing before the board in November 2001, the book was rejected by conservative board members, who said it was factually inaccurate and espoused a "radical" environmental agenda. The board called it "anti-Christian" and "anti-American" because, among other things, it claimed there is a scientific consensus regarding global warming....The director of Citizens for a Sound Economy claimed, among other things, that the book "blames Christianity, Democracy and Industrialization ... as causing the so-called [environmental] 'crisis'" and that this is "highly offensive to patriotic Americans and Christians."
Now, perhaps I missed the law that says books can be banned because they're "anti-Christian," but I'm pretty sure that law doesn't exist. And as far as the book being "highly offensive to patriotic Americans and Christians," I'm pretty sure that isn't legal grounds, either. It just seems to me that there's something wrong with the board being able to make this decision on these grounds, and as it turns out, I'm right:
According to Texas law, the board has the right to reject a textbook if it contains factual errors, but not because it disagrees with the author's viewpoint. Burt Neuborne, a professor of First Amendment law at New York University, says, "You can't choose a book based on the viewpoint of the author. A government official has the power to make determinations based on quality and accuracy, but he does not have the power to censor what school children hear, and turn the school system into a propaganda mill."
Where's my handy-dandy propaganda mill detector?