Rob Rogers

This morning I submitted a formal book reconsideration request concerning a King James Version Bible resource in the Pine Creek High School library catalog.

I want to be clear about what this request is, and what it isn’t.

This isn’t an attack on Christianity. It isn’t an attack on the Bible. It isn’t an attack on students, families, churches, or people of faith.

The Bible has obvious religious, historical, literary, and cultural significance. Pretending otherwise would be unserious.

This request is about whether Academy District 20 applies its library standards neutrally.

This also isn’t the first time ASD20 has faced this exact consistency problem.

In 2023, after the district removed several books from school libraries, I raised the same concern about whether subjective content standards would be applied fairly across all materials, including Bible resources. At the time, I said the issue wasn’t really about the books. It was about the principle. It was about fairness, equity, and whether the same rule would apply to all materials. That challenge was resolved when the district returned the removed books to library shelves.

In other words, the district has already had one opportunity to step back from inconsistent content enforcement.

It did.

Now the board has recreated the same problem with a clearer record and a more explicit vote.

On June 11, 2026, the Academy District 20 Board of Education considered the appeal of a challenge to the young adult novel Almost Perfect, filed by board Director Eddie Waldrep. During that meeting, district staff explained that the reconsideration committee had reviewed the book under district policy and recommended, at a very high level, that it remain in the library. Staff described the committee result as above the district’s retention threshold, and said the superintendent-level appeal review found that the policy had been followed.

So the process worked.

Then the board overrode it.

Despite the committee recommendation and the finding that policy had been followed, the board voted to remove Almost Perfect from all district school library collections. Board members cited concerns about sexual content, alleged medical or health-related risk, student safety, online resources, age appropriateness, and whether the book could lead students toward harm. Board President Amy Shandy also stated that she found the content “immoral in nature and obscene,” referenced the Miller obscenity test, and moved to remove the book on those grounds.

The board action *created* the issue I’m raising now.

My reconsideration request asks whether the same content-based standard applies when the challenged resource is the Bible. The submitted form identifies specific KJV passages involving sexual violence, in**st, be******ty, coercive sexual exploitation, slavery, non-modern health and reproductive instructions, and extreme violence. Those passages are cited by book, chapter, and verse.

The question isn’t whether people value the Bible.

Many do.

The question is whether a public school district may apply one standard to a challenged LGBTQ-related book, then create a different unwritten standard when comparable or more explicit content appears in a favored religious text.

That's the contradiction.

If Academy District 20 believes the King James Version Bible should remain available because of its literary, historical, cultural, or religious importance, then the district should explain why that same kind of context didn’t protect Almost Perfect after the district’s own review process recommended retention.

That’s the consistency test.

Public institutions don’t get to rely on tradition when enforcing policy against one viewpoint, then rely on context when protecting another. They don’t get to treat literary value as decisive for one book and irrelevant for another. They don’t get to invoke age appropriateness, alleged student harm, obscenity, and medical risk when the target is an LGBTQ-related novel, then suddenly rediscover nuance when the text is religious.

Either content standards are neutral, or they aren’t.

Either literary value matters, or it doesn’t.

Either context matters, or it doesn’t.

Either the district is applying policy consistently, or it’s turning policy into a mask for viewpoint preference.

I welcome a serious, policy-based response from the district. I won’t participate in bad-faith claims that this request is anti-Christian. It isn’t.

The district already resolved this kind of problem once by restoring access to removed books.

The board has now *created* the problem again.

I’m asking the district to apply its standards consistently.

Freedom From Religion Foundation Almost Perfect

Anyone else watch and love the 2004 reimagining of Battlestar Galactica?

Anyone remember that Admiral Adama strictly prohibited any networked subsystems to protect against Cylon cyber attacks?

And does anyone remember that the Cylon attack on the Twelve Colonies was enabled by Gaius Baltar being seduced and blackmailed by Caprica Six?

I think about those things a lot.