Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Banned Books Damn Our Children's Future

Opinion

Banned Books Damn Our Children's Future

Two children reading in school.

Getty Images, Jim Craigmyle

April 2nd is International Children's Book Day. It is time to celebrate the transformative power of children's literature and mourn the spaces where stories once lived. The numbers are staggering: there were over 10,000 book bans in U.S. public schools during the 2023-2024 school year alone, affecting more than 4,000 unique titles. Each banned book represents a mirror taken away from a child who might have seen themselves in those pages or a window closed to a child who might have glimpsed a world beyond their own.

I'm a child of the 80s and 90s, back when PBS was basically raising us all. Man, LeVar Burton's voice on Reading Rainbow was like that cool uncle who always knew exactly what book you needed. Remember him saying, "But you don't have to take my word for it"? And Sesame Street—that show was living proof that a kid from the Bronx could learn alongside a kid from rural Kansas, no questions asked. These and other such programs convinced an entire generation that we could "go anywhere" and "be anything.” Also, they were declarations that every child deserves to see themselves in stories, to dream in technicolor, and to imagine futures unlimited by the accidents of birth or circumstance.


Let me tell you something I've learned from years of working with kids, both as a parent and a pastor: magic happens when children find "their" book. You can literally see it. When my students discover characters who share their experiences—their joys, struggles, family structures, and cultural celebrations—their demeanor changes. Their backs and shoulders straighten. Their voices grow more vigorous. They begin to understand that their stories matter and that they belong in the grand narrative of human experience.

Hans Christian Andersen, whose birthday we honor on International Children's Book Day, once wrote, "Life itself is the most wonderful fairy tale." But here's the million-dollar question: whose fairy tales are we determining worthy of shelf space? The answer to that isn't just about books—it's about who we want to be as a society.

This year's theme, "The Freedom of Imagination," feels less like a party and more like a battle cry. And honestly? It should. We're standing at a crossroads, and the path we choose now is going to echo for generations.

To those who defend banning books under the guise of "protection," I ask: what are we protecting our children from? Is it from the knowledge that their classmate has two moms? Do they understand that some of their friends celebrate different holidays? The realization that courage and kindness come in all colors? Give me a break. Real protection means giving kids the tools to understand their world—all of it.

International Children's Book Day reminds us that literacy is more than the ability to decode words on a page. True literacy is the capacity to read the world in all its complex beauty, to recognize oneself in stories, and to develop empathy for experiences unlike our own. That's what really scares the book banners—not that children will be corrupted but that they'll start thinking for themselves.

As our son grows, I reflect on the legacy we're leaving him and all children and youth who are just beginning their journey. Will they find themselves in the pages of their school libraries? Will they see their experiences, their joy, and their unlimited potential reflected in the books they encounter? Children deserve to see themselves as heroes, scientists, artists, leaders, and dreamers. They deserve to know that their stories, their lives, and their futures matter. It must be celebrated, protected, and expanded.

Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson is a spiritual entrepreneur, author, and scholar-practitioner whose leadership and strategies around social and racial justice issues are nationally recognized and applied.

Read More

White Books and Curriculum Damage Black Children

The rise of book bans and erasure of Black history from classrooms emotionally and systematically harms Black children. It's critical that we urge educators to represent Black experiences and stories in class.

Getty Images, Klaus Vedfelt

White Books and Curriculum Damage Black Children

When my son, Jonathan, was born, one of the first children’s books I bought was "So Much" by Trish Cooke. I was captivated by its joyful depiction of a Black family loving their baby boy. I read it to him often, wanting him to know that he was deeply loved, seen, and valued. In an era when politicians are banning books, sanitizing curricula, and policing the teaching of Black history, the idea of affirming Black children’s identities is miscast as divisive and wrong. Forty-two states have proposed or passed legislation restricting how race and history can be taught, including Black history. PEN America reported that nearly 16,000 books (many featuring Black stories) were banned from schools within the last three years across 43 states. These prohibitive policies and bans are presented as protecting the ‘feelings’ of White children, while at the same time ignoring and invalidating the feelings of Black children who live daily with the pain of erasure, distortion, and disregard in schools.

When I hear and see the ongoing devaluation of Black children in schools and public life, I, and other Black parents, recognize this pain firsthand. For instance, recently, my teenage granddaughter, Jaliyah, texted me, asking to visit the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, D.C., because she had heard that the President planned to close it. For what felt like the millionth time, my heart broke with the understanding that too many people fail to rally on behalf of Black children. Jaliyah’s question revealed what so many Black children intuitively understand—that their histories, their feelings, and their futures are often treated as expendable.

Keep ReadingShow less
Pluralism or DEI - or Both - or None?

equity, inclusion, diversity

AI generated

Pluralism or DEI - or Both - or None?

Even before Trump’s actions against DEI, many in the academic community and elsewhere felt for some time that DEI had taken an unintended turn.

What was meant to provide support—in jobs, education, grants, and other ways—to those groups who historically and currently have suffered from discrimination became for others a sign of exclusion because all attention was placed on how these groups were faring, with little attention to others. Those left out were assumed not to need any help, but that was mistaken. They did need help and are angry.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two people in business attire walking into an office.

Dr. Valentina Greco reflects on how accent bias, internalized gatekeeping, and hidden prejudices shape academia—and how true change begins by confronting our own discomfort.

Getty Images, Marco VDM

How Do We Become the Gatekeepers?

“Do you have a moment?”

I turned and saw my senior colleague, Paul (not his real name), a mentor and sponsor, at my office door.

Keep ReadingShow less
So DEI doesn’t work. OK, what would be better?

Conceptual image of multiple human face shapes in a variety of colors illustrating different races

Getty Images

So DEI doesn’t work. OK, what would be better?

It is no secret that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs are under attack in our country. They have been blamed for undermining free speech, meritocracy, and America itself. The University of Virginia is the latest to settle with the government and walk away from its DEI initiatives rather than defend its programs or find a new solution.

Those who decry DEI say they do so in the name of meritocracy. They argue that those who benefit from DEI programs do so at the expense of other, more qualified individuals, and that these programs are weakening professions such as our military, science, education, and healthcare. But these arguments have it exactly backwards. DEI programs were never designed to give privilege to underrepresented people. They were put in place to chip away at discrimination and nepotism, both concepts that are antithetical to meritocracy.

Keep ReadingShow less