Forbid Them Not: A Novel

by Michael Farris

In a courtroom suspense novel with ties to today's issues, the U.S. Senate ratifies the United National Right of the Child, challenging parental rights to make decisions concerning raising their offspring and resulting in a heated battle in the Virginia Supreme Court. Original.

Genres: Fiction, Christian Fiction

472 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2002

Reviews

[Joan Flamank · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is so inaccurate about law and the UN and just about everything in it. The people here saying that it's accurate have absolutely no knowledge of legal procedure or any idea how wrong they are. The information on the UN is also completely inaccurate.

This book is a true Gary Lou effort by the author, who appears to see himself as the hero, a hero who, as a lawyer, should be disbarred for multiple things he does during the book.

It amazes me that a lawyer wrote this. However, Farris did go to a very low level law school, and he's spent most of his career just appearing in appeal cases and SCOTUS, and running another low level law school, so the basic legal stuff in the book seems never to have been done by him. That, or he's just so intent on selling his readers on fearing the UN--something common among Evangelicals--that he just doesn't care, as most of his readers would have no idea what's correct and what isn't.

The writing is terrible. The characters are laughable. The women are symbols, not people.

We're reading this book as a group, so we compare a lot of information on each section. That's also why I haven't finished it yet.

[Mackenzie · Rating 1 out of 5]

The single strangest reading experience of my life.

I probably enjoyed the first 50 pages without much complication. The next 100 pages I took with amused suspicion—"I like these characters, but I know I'm being manipulated." After page 200, I was angry. And yet, I'm glad to have read it, I think, if only because I did learn something.

FORBID THEM NOT tracks a fictional case from its initial conception in the bowels (or grand room, whatever) of the Geneva Convention to a dusty town outside of Washington, D.C., where the U.N. reps have set their hooks, to the case's Supreme Court decision. At the crux of the case are two families—but not really; they are merely pawns in the government's scheme to dictate how parents educate and discipline their children. Yes, the U.N. is the Bad Guy, and not complicatedly so at all. The plotters of the Convention on the Rights of the Child scheme against small-town Christian families to gain a foothold on American politics where they have no elected right (but right by treaty) to enforce its principles "in the best interest of the children," as they abstractly see fit. The main character is the families' defense attorney, lowly and singularly-working Cooper Stone, and he's up against a powerhouse of attorneys, each an Ivy League grad and with a cohort of well paid help. At its finest, the book is a good tale of the underdog. At its worst, the book belittles the complexities and intricacies of actual human beings. Conservatives are right by default; liberals are not only wrong by default but have no depth. When the main character kisses a liberal woman from the opposing side of the case, his "error in judgment" is called a "sin" (313). Oh, so what we have now is theological and political propaganda, not literature.

However, consider the warning on the jacket and after the copyright page, "Although the law in this book is completely accurate, this story is fiction—for now." Already, Farris sets up the reader for anxiety, or plays on an existing one. I agree with at least the premise of the novel and even share the essentials of the Christian faith the book supports, if not in the particulars, so I may well be an ideal audience for this book: I would not need much convincing that the government, particularly world orders, should not interfere with a parent's right to parent in a religious context. However, the plot is so overplayed, the Bad Guys so unbelievably villainous, the Good Guys so uninterestingly virtuous, that there is nothing but tripe in the overall storytelling. I agree with the central ideas, but I think most people would, conservative or liberal. Farris's storytelling taxes the reader with anxiety for issues that do not seem to be in peril (spanking, religious instruction, and a parent's control of their children's education). Even for the practicing Christian, the religious dialogue is so unnatural and forced (e.g., "I know you did the wrong thing here, but I want you to know that I still love you like a brother. We are OK. You understand?" (244)) as to be comical.

With some look into Michael Farris, Cooper Stone becomes an obvious authorial wish fulfillment: similar backgrounds, but Cooper is young and attractive and the David to the U.N.'s Goliath. Farris also apparently founded Patrick Henry College, to which he gives one inside-joke-funny homage, an unnamed mention to "a beautiful little college." Apparently, PHC has seen its own scandals, which Farris always handles with prompt denial. None of this background actually matters in terms of the novel, but already frustrated with its treatment of people as non-people (the good guys or the bad guys), I had to know more about the person who thought this story worth telling, this case worth following with all the fear and anxiety it invokes. My anger has turned more to mild bemusement. Once suspicious, I now know the book is written for a small sect of Americans frightened of American liberalism.

On the upside, I did actually learn about American government and world government and the interplay between them. I had not heard of the treaty of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and I didn't know that homeschooling was once illegal in most states. I wish I had had these lessons in a different context, but regardless, I am glad to learn some history and civics wherever I find them.

[Lori · Rating 5 out of 5]

While the book is fiction, all the law in the book is factual and it could actually happen. It is written under the premise that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is ratified and the UN board of directors begins trying to bring lawsuits against parents in the US that they feel are in violation of the treaty. They sue parents for spanking, teaching their children that Jesus is the only way to heaven and homeschooling. The book follows their lawsuits all the way to the Supreme Court.

It is always enjoyable to read books by Christian authors because the characters are often Christians and display true Christian principles. Having a man actually resist the temptation to sleep with a woman outside of marriage is certainly refreshing. While the characters are not perfect and make mistakes, they are interesting and intriguing and are true to life.

At the end of the book is the text to the actual UN Convention on the Rights of the Child so you can see for yourself some of the aspects that are mentioned in the book. I did not want to put the book down and could not wait to see how it ended but I am fearful that someday I may be reading about this sort of thing in the news, rather than in a fictional novel. Michael Farris is also the founder of ParentalRights.org and there you can find information about how to protect parental rights and keep things like this from actually happening.

[Sarah · Rating 1 out of 5]

None of this book makes sense. None. Why would the UN want to take over the US (hint: they don’t and they won’t)? And why would the US ratifying the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child lead to banning the good foundational Evangelical practices of child-beating, homeschooling without accountability, and telling people they are going to hell? Reality check: in the vast majority of the countries that have adopted this Convention, all three are still allowed (Hello Canada! Angelic would know this...). Why would Michael Farris...err, I mean Cooper Stone be the one to take the case? With no experience in this area, he should be handing the case off to someone more competent. I could list all the things wrong with this book, but that would take about 400 pages. So here are a few of my favorites, in no particular order:
-Erzabet Kadar, evil head of the UN, tries to sabotage the case by having Jody Easler, US Ambassador, seduce Cooper. It half works and photos of them kissing get published. HOW DOES THIS NOT SABOTAGE THEIR SIDE, TOO????????
-When that plot fails, Kadar tries to have Jody killed, and does so in a manner that can be easily traced directly back to her. If she is so slick that she can get a Supreme Court Justice killed and make it look like a heart attack, you would think she would be smart enough to properly hire a hitman.
-Cooper Stone is described as being “Billy Graham in Matt Damon’s body”. He is also very painfully obviously an author standin.
-Most of the characters have jobs, yet none of them seem to actually ever go to work. They are mysteriously free in the middle of the day in the middle of the week.
-They can tell who the hitman is because he has ugly shoes, and all Eastern European men have ugly shoes.

Aside from all of the stupidity, this book is also painfully boring. The plot is slow, the writing is terrible, the characters are cardboard cutouts (especially the women). There are even pages upon pages of chat room transcripts. My advice: save your sanity and pass on this book.

[B.e. Miller · Rating 1 out of 5]

It starts out as a book about a UN Treaty, and parental rights to hit their children, and teach said children that the only path to salvation is through Christianity, but ends up becoming something that resembles an old Cold War story, but with the UN as the bad guy rather than Russia.

There are also way too many pages of chat-room yakkers. This book could have used a good editor to pare it down and trim the storyline of unnecessary items.

Michael Farris is the starter of the Home School Legal Defense Association, a pro-proponent of homeschool education, and a conservative fundamentalist Christianist. This book is really propaganda for such a sub-culture, with its idea of a UN conspiracy that will forbid Christianity, and take children from said Christians.

[Carolyn Daniels · Rating 4 out of 5]

Following a liberal shift in government, two families must defend their right to teach Christianity to their children, discipline them, and make educational decisions. Scary!

[Nikhil · Rating 5 out of 5]

Eye-opening account of how external organizations like the UN can influence internal law. In the book, parental rights are the focus. Choices about how a child should be raised, etc. This is something that should be left to the parent and not the government. I hope this doesn't happen in the United States but it does give food for thought and concern to keep a watch on what policies are being set forth.

[Suzanne Benner · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting premise.