As Kevin Drum notes, National Review writer David Frum recently made the disturbing argument that “Christian principle” should determine what is taught in public schools:

[Frum on h]ow evolution should be taught in public schools: “I don’t believe that anything that offends nine-tenths of the American public should be taught in public schools. … Christianity is the faith of nine-tenths of the American public. … I don’t believe that public schools should embark on teaching anything that offends Christian principle.”

This sort of tyranny of the majority would irreparably harm education, imposing political and religious tests on all kinds of content that children need to be exposed to in a pluralistic society (not to mention violating principles of church/state separation). And what’s so ironic about Frum’s advocacy of a Christian litmus test is that it conflicts so directly with the way conservatives mock liberals for trying to protect students’ feelings. Frum himself conducted an approving interview with Sally Satel and Christina Sommers about their book One Nation Under Therapy in which they criticized the impulse to protect children from potentially offensive material:

SATEL & SOMMERS: The temptation to treat children as psychically fragile seems to be irresistible to many parents and educators… It is now the practice for “sensitivity and bias committees” inside publishing houses to expunge from standardized tests all mention of potentially distressing topics. Two major companies specifically interdict references to rats, mice, roaches, snakes, lice, typhoons, blizzards and birthday parties. (The latter could create bad feelings in children whose families don’t celebrate them.)

Apparently, “sensitivity and bias committees” are fine as long as they’re “sensitive” to the concerns of your side (and your side is the majority).

More importantly, whoever said you have a right to not be confronted with challenging or disturbing content in school? Both sides need to suck it up.