SB434

Book bans are anti-freedom and against the values of NH!

I oppose this bill because it allows a very few or even one person with too much time on their hands to dictate to everyone else because they think they know better. Usually there is a hidden agenda that is directing their actions. Rule by democracy is always better than a dictatorship and we should always seek the groups opinion or stay the course. A single person who does these book bans is usually an eccentric who thinks outside the main stream. They have an over inflated sense of self and will lead in a destructive direction. History has shown this over and over. Any society that has a lot of book banning and book burnings is a society that is headed to a destructive conclusion. Less knowledge makes no one better. Thanks Minister Ray

I oppose book banning. No one should be making these decisions for others. If you don't want to read it, just don't. But don't prevent others who want to.

This is another book ban. Education is the marketplace of ideas. Libraries must be free from censure. This bill poorly and broadly defines materials. This bill creates a bureaucratic process that takes educators away from actually educating. If one wants a narrow choice of materials then home school.

This is school censorship! The local school boards can determine the appropriate material to be in public schools. School board members are elected by the voters in their districts and voters can bring any issues to the school board members. This bill would rip away that right to self determination. Please oppose this bill. I take into account voting records of any person running for public office and hope you will consider my point of view. Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter.

Speaking as a librarian, attempts to censor books are of great concern to me. Allowing parental complaints to dictate what other people's children can read or have access to violates fundamental rights and is flagrantly unAmerican. What is valuable to one reader may not be to another. What is obscene to one reader may not be to another. There is absolutely no good reason to let the overall availability of books be dictated by individual complainants with no background in childhood development or experience in an educational setting.

When is enough…enough? Educators and librarians are more than capable of including or omitting books for our children. Stop trying to control people’s lives!!!

Stop banning books. Give kids a choice.

As a citizen of the live free or die state, why are we banning books and limiting choices. We are known for independence and freedom.

Book banning is what the Nazis did. Why on earth would be want to emulate them unless we are seeking to destroy public education, democracy, and freedom? Please stop this fascist nonsense.

Can you please stop wasting time on frivolous legislation such as book bands, and focus on issues that actually affect the well-being and livelihood of residents of New Hampshire? You are wasting precious time and taxpayer money with your ridiculous trivial legislation.

I adamantly oppose any effort to ban books. This is clearly censorship.

Students have a right to read; restricting access to any reading material based on another person's or group of persons', particular perception of what is or is not "appropriate" is simply wrong in a free society.

My name is Sara Tirrell, I live in Plymouth, and I am here as the parent of a 17-year-old daughter who attends Plymouth Regional High School. I ask this committee to vote ITL on SB 434. This bill is called the "Right to Challenge Act," and it sounds reasonable on its face - of course parents should be able to raise concerns about school materials. But the devil is in the language. The bill ties its complaint process to New Hampshire's legal definition of "harmful to minors", which is actually our obscenity statute, a narrow and well-defined standard. But then it goes much further, allowing complaints about anything deemed "age-inappropriate" or "otherwise offensive or inappropriate." Those phrases have no legal definition. Under that standard, any parent could file a formal complaint against a book, a speaker, or a lesson simply because a character is transgender, gay, or from a background different from their own. "Offensive" to one family can be "life-saving" to another. And this isn't a hypothetical chilling effect. It is already happening. My daughter's English teacher told us this year that he would love to teach more contemporary literature, books that reflect the world students actually live in, but that he worries about backlash from certain parents, so he sticks to texts like The Scarlet Letter and The Great Gatsby. This is a teacher who wants to do more for his students. He is already censoring himself, and SB 434 hasn't even passed yet. This bill would hand that fearful instinct a formal legal mechanism - with written appeals, public records, and school board votes, and it would make things far worse. There is one more thing this bill does that I want this committee to understand: it does not give a parent the right to opt their own child out of material. It gives one parent the power to trigger a process that can result in district-wide removal for every child. That is not parental rights. That is one parent's preferences overriding every other family in the school. My daughter deserves to go to school and find books, speakers, and materials that reflect that she exists and belongs in this world. SB 434, despite its title, would give any other parent the legal tools to erase her. I urge this committee to vote it down. Thank you.

It is ridiculous to think that the legislature knows better than individuals and parents what should be available to readers. Who and what are you afraid of?

Another bill to censor educational materials. Allowing people to ban books, videos, and other materials in our schools. Another bill where I'm sure a lot of us are weighing in today, telling our legislators that it is important to not pass this bill. I have no impression that the majority of this committee will actually listen to members of the public, I bet you'll skim by these testimonials and decide you know better than the people you're supposed to serve. Despite that, let me tell you a story in case you'll actually read this. I was fortunate to grow up in a diverse community. My friends came from different cultures, different backgrounds. We all read a lot of books. We were particular fans of the Magic Tree House series and would imagine where we would go if we took the journey alongside the characters. In fifth grade a few of my friends and I decided to write a book. It was clearly inspired by the Magic Tree House. I asked my friend to draw some pictures for the book. And like any fifth grader would do, she drew pictures of people who looked like us! Including a character wearing a hijab, like she wore. It was a story of love and of adventure and princes and princesses. It was silly, but here's the thing: we didn't see many picture books with characters who wore hijabs, and this story reflected our real lives. Under a law like what this bill suggests, someone who doesn't agree with my best friend's religion could make an argument to the school to ban that picture book we created. They could remove it. They could sterilize the classroom of anything that is "different" than the, frankly, cisgender, white, christian view that is reflective of what the bill sponsors would prefer. When you start banning materials from schools, you take away children's opportunities to learn, to grow, and to make their own decisions based on research and independent reading. You sanitize education and take away students' autonomy to make decisions for themselves about what they want to read and write about. I urge the committee to vote no. And to start listening to the people showing up to testify online and in person.

This bill will do two things. First, it will provide yet another avenue for censorship and book-banning. No data has been presented showing any significant incidence rate of truly age-inappropriate materials appearing in public K-12 schools. The subjective nature of the law allows for challenges on any nonsensical rationale, so that various religious groups will be able to continuously challenge materials that go against cherry-picked "teachings" from their religion. Second, it will place an undue burden on school administrators, as every challenge must be addressed in specific ways that cost time and money. Further, there is no limitation on the number of challenges an individual may make, and there are no provisions that create legal consequences for individuals who present challenges to materials without having a child present within the school or school district. I trust our school administrators choice of materials, as we are well informed of them every single year. There is no purpose to this law other than to create more cost and more work for employees in a system that YOU REFUSE TO FUND.

This bill is discriminatory and is in opposition to the value of New Hampshire citizens.

One size does not fit all. What is appropriate for one age group is different for another. The teacher and individual school should make decisions on what should be taught or read by their students. Making district-wide bans based on one voice would severely limit appropriate teaching moments and materials.

Stop treading all over our freedoms. Let teachers teach. Go home, Free Staters!

This looks like Politically motivated and subjective proposal. I feel that a small group is vying for nothing more than power and control.There are always two sides to the story. You should have weighed both of these with no bias.

More rules to take the time of an overworked school administration and the teachers. Book challenges have been successfully addressed through existing district policies. This is not going to assist in a better education the next generation.

This bill is an insult to public school & education professionals. There are existing systems and policies to address any concerns about teaching materials. This is something school boards and districts work out and have addressed for decades. Leave them alone. The Legislature has no role here. Vote ITL.

Another day wasting people's time when there are bigger issues to be dealing with! Stop banning books and stop messing with the arts!

Please oppose SB434. The proposed bill would codify a procedure for unnecessary censorship, thus restricting materials that should be available to all children. Under the proposed legislation, any one parent could force the review of materials previously deemed to be appropriate in a particular classroom/library/school setting. One parent's disapproval should never be sufficient to censor school materials and overturn the judgement of education professionals. Thank you. Jillian Leigh Hampton Falls