Federal Prisons and Religious Books
Back in 2007, the Federal Bureau of Prisons unleashed a “Standardized Chapel Library” project that limited prison libraries to an approved list of titles (including 131 approved Pagan titles). All other books, no matter what the content, were pulled from the shelves. The lists (which, despite claims to the contrary, were not drawn up by religious experts), and the pulling of titles, created a firestorm of controversy, forcing the BOP to back down. Congress then passed a new rule forbidding the BOP from pulling this stunt again in the future. Prevented from having an “approved” master list, the BOP is instead going for the next best thing.
Yesterday, the Federal Bureau of Prisons published a proposed rule change in the Federal Register (full text) that permits prison chapel libraries to exclude books, audiotapes and videos that “could incite, promote or otherwise suggest the commission of violence or other criminal activity.” The proposed rule defines this as including material that advocates violence toward particular religious, racial or ethnic groups as well as material that urges overthrow or destruction of the United States.
Seems rather reasonable until you realize that the new rule doesn’t specify who exactly will be making the judgement calls on which literature crosses the line into “advocating violence” or “urging overthrow”. Wouldn’t preconceived notions come into all this if it were up to individual prison librarians or administrators? After all, some have argued that the Bible is rather antisemitic in places and encourages violence. Maybe you think all the Pagan books would be safe, but what if the local decision-maker reads a lot of WorldNetDaily? Or, what if they read Leland’s “Gospel of the Witches” a bit too literally? What about an evangelical who thinks Mormonism is a dangerous cult? It would be somewhat naive to think that only radically violent or racist literature would be weeded out.
If there is going to be a rule to pull dangerous books, there needs to be transparency about how decisions are made, and who those decision-makers are, otherwise we are in danger of pervasive bias entering into the process. Public comments on this rule change are being accepted until March 17th, 2009. If you want to call for more built-in transparency into this process, you can use this online commenting form to (politely) voice your concerns.
One response so far
wow! This could affect a lot of native Americans, like Peltier. It is scary, like they may start outlawing religions again soon.