Arizona is so pro-life they won’t stand for references to birth control or abortion in biology textbooks — or at least The Gilbert Public Schools Governing Board won’t. The board recently voted to have two pages of a biology textbook called Campbell Biology removed. Apparently, the sub-chapter on contraception is in violation of a two-year law that states childbirth and adoption are to be taught as the preferred options to elective abortion.

The American Civil Liberties Union wrote in to the Glibert board to urge them not to censor education materials, especially since Arizona law doesn’t say birth control and abortion can’t be taught, just that adoption is to be promoted as the best option, Jezebel reported. Because The Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal advocacy group, basically strong-armed the board into this decision, it doesn't believe this is censorship. The board said this is the “cheapest, simplest, least disruptive, and most efficient way to deal with the issue.” To quote Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglass: “Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.”

While teachers, principals, and school administrators can remove a book or two from the curriculum without being guilty of censorship, the National Council of Teachers of English and the International Reading Association have said there is an important distinction between selection based on professional guidelines and censorship. “Whereas the goal of censorship is to remove, eliminate, or bar particular materials and methods, the goal of professional guidelines is to provide criteria for selection of materials and methods,” the organizations explained. Being motivated by hostility bypasses selection and coasts into censorship.

The National Coalition of Censorship (obviously) advocates, “censorship based on individual sensitivities and concerns restricts the world of knowledge available to students.” With regards to birth control and abortion in particular, comprehensive, accurate sex education reduces teen pregnancy. Not only that, but a 2012 study conducted by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unintended Pregnancy found that 63 percent of teens aged 15 to 17 wanted more information on the different methods of contraception. Meanwhile, 49 percent of teens aged 12 to 19 wished they received more information about abstinence and contraception, rather than just one or the other.

What’s wrong with Arizona mandating that young women and men learn the benefits of childbirth and adoption? Nothing, if they're knowledgeable to the full-extent of their choice. One-sided sex education (even an abridged version in biology class) does a disservice to young people. Yes, so much good can come from childbirth and adoption, but so can serious harm. Save The Children released a report in 2012 that found "children having children" often die because their bodies aren’t mature enough to deliver the baby. In turn, 60 percent of babies are at an increased risk of death when their mother is younger than 18.

Still want to use the phrases simple and least-disruptive, Arizona?