Back in March, it was reported that author Simon James Green had been blocked from visiting John Fisher, a Catholic state school, because of an anti-LGBT+ smear campaign against the gay author and his gay character. However, if you look past the headlines and into the actual content of the book, this is clearly something all parents need to know about, whatever your faith, beliefs and opinions.

Green’s book Noah Can’t Even (2017) was meant to be the focus for the World Book Day presentation and signing at the John Fisher School. The event was for pupils in years 8 and 9, ranging from 12 to 13 years old. The book, and its sequel, Noah Could Never (2018) are published by Scholastic Children’s Books.

“Let us pray,” “Our Father, who art the gay boy? Noah by his name..” Oh yes, “people have better things to think about.” “He makes Harry come. He gives him one. On earth as it is in heaven…’ “And lead him straight into temptation. Right into a gay bar. For Noah is a gay boy. Who likes to suck cock. For ever and ever. He’s gay.” “OK, sit yourselves down!” said Mr. Baxter, head of year. The Year Elevens shuffled on their seats. Noah despondently plopped back down, straight onto a banana that the hilarious occupants of the row behind had placed on his seat during the prayer. “Awww - right up the arse!” said one of the lads. (It wasn’t.) “He loves it!” said another. (He didn’t.) “Oh, Harry! Do it to me!” sighed a girl. (Not a phrase he would ever use. He wasn’t a porn star with no class.) 

This chapter alone (chapter 12, pages 124-125) is sickening on two levels: 

1. It is completely not age-appropriate for children since it utilises graphic, vulgar language, as well as scenes of an erotic nature, wholly inappropriate for a young developing mind.
2. It is completely derogatory, highly offensive and discriminatory against Christians who hold the ‘Our Father’ as sacred. 

The Archbishop who cancelled this author’s visit to the school, Archbishop John Wilson, has been vilified for protecting the students from exposure to such language and profanities. If he is being accused of being intolerant towards the LGBTQ+ community – which is false – then how can the author of these books be free to use highly offensive language against Christians? The majority of the media and the author himself have gone to great lengths to make it appear that the Archbishop is homophobic and that the cause for his decision was motivated by anti-LGBTQ+ prejudices, whilst none of them revealed excerpts such as the above – which is only one amongst many. It has been mistakenly reported in the media that the book simply has a gay character and some ‘kissing’. This claim is dishonest and deceitful.

It is important to set the record straight that Mr Green’s sexual orientation never was the reason for concern. It is the content of the material. If a passage such as that above had been written from a heterosexual perspective, it would have been equally unacceptable.

In Noah Could Never, early in chapter 4, on page 35, there is the following narrative. (The capitalisation is in the original.)

Worse, Connor was positioning himself as some sort of alpha gay within the school. He’d dyed his quaffed hair peroxide blond, his trousers had got tighter, his muscles bigger, and Noah had no doubt his body hair situation would be completely in line with what the gay websites said it should be. Rumour had it, Connor was seeing a boy in year thirteen – two years his senior! How very edgy. That meant Connor was also probably sexually experienced now, taken under the wing of this sugar daddy in the sixth form, who would have doubtless shown him exactly what to do and when to do it. If anything did ever happen with Noah and Harry in that department, Noah was going to have to rely on playground banter, dubious websites and his book on puberty (that didn’t mention anything about being gay in it) for guidance. Some people had it so easy.

All the more reason for Harry to see that what Noah might lack in the GAY SEX KNOWLEDGE department, he more than made up for with public speaking skills. And, after all, which was more important?

We must ask you if the narrative were about a female pupil in Year 11 and a male pupil in Year 13, who was her ‘sugar daddy’ and had ‘doubtless shown [her] exactly what to do and when to do it,’ would the world deem this acceptable?

Schools should seek to teach young people how to love and cherish every individual. Green’s books, instead, objectify individuals. 

Who is being attacked here could just as well be your religious leader, headteacher, or yourself, silenced for seeking to protect our children. Do you find Green’s language age-inappropriate or disrespectful to Christians? Please sign, support and share our petition.