Oppose Bills Threatening Access to LGBTQ+ Materials in MO

I urge you to oppose the following bills that, if enacted, pose severe threats to intellectual freedom, inclusivity, and the unrestricted access to essential LGBTQ+ materials. These bills, namely SB1272 (Schroer), SB950 (Brattin), HB1543 (Coleman), HB2374 (Christensen), HB1426 (McGirl), HB1855 (Banderman), HB1993 (Gallick), HB1574 (Christensen), HB2408 (Gragg), and SB 1084 (Brattin), contain provisions that could lead to censorship, potential discrimination, and the hindrance of educational resources about sexual orientation and gender identity. Starting with SB1272, SB950, HB1543, HB2374, HB1426, HB1855, and HB1993, which raise concerns about the potential suppression of LGBTQ+ materials in schools. While the bills purport to address the issue of explicit and harmful materials, their language is overly broad, especially in the definition of "harmful to minors," which could be subjectively construed to limit access to educational resources exploring LGBTQ+ topics. The risk of stifling inclusive and diverse educational resources is significant. The introduction of HB1574 and HB2408, focusing on age-appropriate materials in libraries, is equally troubling. Their vague language could easily be misconstrued to restrict access to LGBTQ+ materials. The requirement for libraries to adopt restrictive collection development policies and age-appropriate designations may inadvertently result in the censorship of valuable LGBTQ+ resources, jeopardizing intellectual freedom. The provision allowing challenges to age-appropriate designations may also facilitate targeted attempts to suppress LGBTQ+ perspectives. Libraries must maintain their open and inclusive nature, serving as bastions of diverse knowledge and ideas for all. Lastly, my opposition extends to SB1084, which introduces alarming potential for online censorship. While the bill aims to shield young users from explicit material, the broad definition of "obscene" and the requirement for internet service providers to offer filtering systems may inadvertently suppress valuable LGBTQ+ content. The opt-in/opt-out system raises concerns about restricting access to crucial information, potentially hindering the principles of free expression and equal access to diverse content online. In conclusion, these bills, if passed, could have severe consequences on the accessibility of LGBTQ+ materials, potentially leading to censorship and discrimination. I urge lawmakers to prioritize intellectual freedom, inclusivity, and the right to information for all individuals by reconsidering and revising these bills. It is essential to ensure that our educational institutions, libraries, and online platforms remain spaces that foster understanding, tolerance, and access to diverse perspectives.