Censor ALERT
SHAME ON STEVE ABRAMS
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
“They seem to indicate, ’We don’t care what the state board does, and we don’t care what parents want, we are going to continue teaching evolution just as we have been doing.’ But I guess we shouldn’t be surprised, because superintendents and local boards of education in some districts continue to promulgate pornography as ‘literature,’ even though many parents have petitioned the local boards to remove the porn.”
Kansas State Board of Education Chairman, Steve Abrams. Quote drawn from a November 15, 2005 Associated Press report on KMBC-TV.
REMEMBER: these are the books Abrams is calling obscene:
All the Pretty Horses, Cormac McCarthy
Animal Dreams, Barbara Kingsolver
The Awakening, Kate Chopin
The Bean Trees, Barbara Kingsolver
Beloved, Toni Morrison
Black Boy, Richard Wright
Fallen Angels, Walter Dean Meyers
Hot Zone, Richard Preston
I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, Maya Angelou
Lords of Discipline, Pat Conroy
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Ken Kesey
Song of Solomon, Toni Morrison
Stotan, Chris Crutcher
This Boy's Life, Tobias Wolff
|
|
|
 | | The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky |
| | | |
THE "PERKS" OF BEING HONEST
Tis the season, it seems. I have another censor alert to post, when the last one isn't even cold yet.
On November 22, 2005 Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne decided THE PERKS OF BEING A WALLFLOWER by Stephen Chbosky was "objectionable" and should off limits to all Arizona students -- after reading one page (31) of the award winning novel out of context.
"I'm hoping that if they have this book on the shelves they make sure that this is no longer available to minors or any other students for that matter," Horne said in a newspaper report, "and they will check to see if there are any other books like that on their shelves. I wouldn't dream of trying to stop adults from reading it, but schools should not make this book available to students in their charge."
In a letter sent to all Arizona Superintendents, Principals and Charter Holders Horne said, "I personally find the sexual material in this book extremely objectionable (see page 31, which contains a detailed scene of oral sex)."
If that's not shocking to you -- Horne's "personal offense" -- it's time to check your pulse and the United States Constitution, not to mention the Supreme Court rulings on free speech, the Board of Education vs. Pico to be specific.
In that case, according to First Amendment Center legal expert Claire Mullally, "The Court recognized that the rights of students are 'directly and sharply implicated' when a book is removed from a school library. Therefore, the discretion of school boards to remove books from school libraries is limited."
Read this next section carefully, to understand why Horne is way, way off the mark.
Mullally writes, "The law requires that if a book is to be removed, an inquiry must be made as to the motivation and intention of the party calling for its removal. If the party’s intention is to deny students access to ideas with which the party disagrees, it is a violation of the First Amendment."
In other words, Horne has every right to dislike the book on his own time, to ban it from his own household. But he has no right to use his position of authority -- or to intimidate educators -- to see that the book is yanked from library shelves.
I understand that Horne may have lived a flawless childhood, free of abuse or disfunction. If so, good for him. There's one. But countless young people grow up in the throws of abuse and neglect, and Stephen Chbosky's novel SPEAKS to those kids. Pulling books like Chbosky's censors the writer and the kids who would find comfort in reading him.
Censor page 31, make it too horrible to read or talk about, and you silence kids whose own lives are tame in comparison. They no longer feel safe enough to ask for the help they may so desperately need.
Should Horne's personal feelings to influence his professional duties? Is he responsible for the academic well being and progress of ALL students, or only those sheltered by Ward and June Cleaver?
Please use this email form to share your thoughts on this issue with Tom Horne. Please consider saying no to censoring books that can help save lives.
To read an excerpt from THE PERKS OF BEING A WALLFLOWER, click here.
Submit a 200 word letter to the editor to the Arizona Republic newspaper HERE. |
|
|
 | | The novel in question. |
| | | |
Taking PROTECTION a step too far...
On Monday, November 21, the Associated Press ran an article about the banning of Brent Hartinger's novel GEOGRAPHY CLUB in the University Press School District, near Tacoma in Washington State. Superintendent Patti Banks banned the book in response to two parents (in one family, if I understand correctly) alarmed by Hartinger's character's choice to meet a friend he'd "talked" with in an Internet chat forum. They insisted the book be pulled from shelves, and Banks complied.
BRENT HARTINGER'S RESPONSE (click here).
MY EDITORIAL IN THE SEATTLE TIMES (click here).
After NBC's startling report on Internet predation, the concern is not without merit. But Banks misses opportunity and countless other points in banning this book.
If parents are afraid of online predators, why not use the book to discuss those very dangers, instead of hiding from the possibility? And like driving an automobile or eating shellfish, not ALL incidents of online friendship turn out to be disaterous encounters. Some kids actually find friendships that mature and last. If the 'Net is used SAFELY, it's not such a danger.
If you live in or near the University Press School District, please drop Ms. Banks a note expressing your thoughs about banning books at her email here:
\n This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
href="mailto:
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
">
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
HarperCollins GEOGRAPHY CLUB link.
MY LETTER
Nov. 21, 2005
Ms. Banks,
I am certain you had concern for young people in mind when you banned GEOGRAPHY CLUB from the University Place School District. The Internet can be a dangerous and predatory place.
But in censoring the book, you have loosed a more dangerous message -- a message that expresses disregards the United States Supreme Court's value and judgements; one that threatens our First Amendment right to free speech.
I urge you to validate the concerns of the parents who complained by listening to those complaints. I encourage you to applaud them for being aware of what their young people are reading and for exercising their parental right to approve or veto a book they might not like.
But tossing the book out for all students -- including gay and lesbian students already marginalized by the political climate in America today; students three times more likely to commit suicide because they feel discounted and unseen -- is far more dangerous than the Internet.
They have every right to see their lives -- their sense of isolation -- reflected in young adult fiction. And author Brent Hartinger knows that reality first hand. Gay kids turn to the 'Net and the dangers there because they have no other voice, no other safe place to stand up and be counted.
In banning this book, you have made it MORE likely gay teens will turn to the 'Net for friendship and understanding, because you have taken away a safer venue -- a fictional story; a book. You have accomplished something altogether contrary to your stated goal.
You have also slipped into a dangerous place that will empower other people with their own value judgements about various books to take aim and action. An atheist might see the Christian fiction as a danger to his children. A creationist might demand the removal of a biography on Darwin. A vegetarian might demand all references to meat eating pulled from library shelves.
They each have valid concerns -- real dangers have arisen from each of those otherwise non-perilous harbors just as they have on the Internet. And each person is entitled to their own choices and value judgements, when it comes to their own children. But they are not entitled to make those judgements for other people's children. Neither, Ms. Banks, are you -- not according to the US Supreme Court.
I strongly urge you to rethink your decision. I formally register my opposition to this stance. And I have contacted hundreds of like minded Washington State citizens in the hopes that they will encourage you to do the same.
Freedom matters. So does a student's right to read. I hope you'll consider both as the days and weeks move on.
Sincerely,
Kelly Milner Halls
Freelance Writer
MS. BANKS RESPONSE
Dear Ms. Halls,
Thank you for your thoughtful comments. As a former English teacher, and someone who would ordinarly describe herself as "a liberal Catholic," I want to assure you that my rationale for withdrawing the book from library circulation was based solely on a protective (I'm sure reasonable people could argue "overprotective") stance toward our students. I have pasted below the more lengthy rationale that I sent to our staff members, if you are interested.
This was a difficult decision, but ultimately I felt that as a school, our messages to young adolescents need to be consistent regarding the dangers of meeting people via the Internet. I did feel that in the book the "happy outcome" that the protagonist experiences when the person he meets turns out to be another teen from his school was not particularly realistic .... predators never identify themselves as such, and they are frighteningly skilled at tapping into the loneliness and fear of vulnerable students.
Further, if you have read the book you will note that it is written at about a 5th grade level---the juxtaposition of serious themes (e.g., gay students' fear and isolation, student harassment, Internet chat rooms, teen sex, etc., etc.) presented in such an "elementary" level was worrisome to me.
At any rate, I understand your thoughts and concerns, and hope you can appreciate mine. I was at pains to communicate that I believed the book did have some value, and that I support our libraries having a rich collection representative of our student body, including our gay/lesbian students. If you are interested, see below.
Sincerely,
patti banks
Principals and Supervisors,
I anticipate an article in the TNT tomorrow concerning The Geography Club. Please forward this e-mail to your staffs.
Some of you are aware that I recently made the decision to withdraw a book (The Geography Club, by Brent Hartinger) from the library collections at the junior high and high school, following a complaint filed by parents regarding its content. This book's subject is a group of gay/lesbian students, who are sophomores in a high school, but unknown to each other because each is fearful of the fallout should he/she be exposed. Among its themes are strong anti-harassment messages. Someone contacted the TNT regarding the "banning" of this book, whose protagonist is a gay teenager, claiming that the district was banning any reference to gay students from our libraries. This misrepresents my rationale for withdrawing the book, which I did after deep conversation with our secondary librarians, who were very concerned about the need for our libraries to reflect our diverse student body. I want to share with you my thinking in this matter.
1. I'm sure you're aware of the statistics surrounding Internet sex predators (ironically MSNBC just had a big show on it last weekend). Responsible sources report that there are 50,000 predators online at any given time, and the numbers of reports of children being aggressively solicited for sex is growing exponentially, according to the Center for Missing and Exploited Children. "One in five kids has been sexually solicited. In many cases the incidents were aggressive, where the person on the other end of the computer is actually calling the child, sending things to their homes, or actually trying to meet them in person."
"Teenagers are very vulnerable; it just ups the ante when you bring it on to the World Wide Web and that many more people have access to knowing what's going on in a child's mind." (Michele Collins, Center for Missing and Exploited Children, as reported to MSNBC). A short Google search will provide you with a boatload of scary statistics in this regard. This is one of the reasons we employ a series of age-indexed filters (I know that's controversial!) for use of the Internet by students on school computers.
2. Pursuant to district policy, the parents filed a Request for Reconsideration of Instructional Materials with the district regarding the book, which was in our junior high and high school libraries.
3. I read the book before considering any action. While I understand our librarians' sense that there is a real need for literature that addresses the issues faced by gay/lesbian teens, I was alarmed to find that a significant plot device in the book revolves around the protagonist (feeling understandably lonely and fearful of being "discovered" at his high school) visiting an Internet chat room. He then arranges to meet someone he connects with on the Internet (i.e., a stranger), in a park at night. In the book, the guy he meets is another closeted gay teenager from his own high school, and it has the positive effect of bringing together other gay / lesbian students in the high school, which mediates
their sense of isolation and fear, happy endings for all. It was my judgment that this extremely high risk behavior was excessively romanticized, portrayed in a casual way, with no balancing message of the danger of this type of interaction. As side issues, I had a bit of personal trouble with some of the language in the book, albeit the likely realism that "[some]kids do talk like that today." But the reason for withdrawing the book was the fact that I can't get past the Internet chat room meeting, and its stark contradiction
with the messages we are trying to send our students about this.
4. I strongly support the commitment and effort of our librarians to maintain rich book collections that are representative of our diverse student body, including our gay/lesbian students. I know these students often suffer in real life the fear and loneliness of the book's protagonist, and the book's strong anti-harassment theme is an important one. Susan Schmidt will be supporting sending two librarians to a workshop from the Bureau of Education Research on "What's New in Young Adult Literature," where high quality contemporary literature for a diverse array of students is reviewed, to support their efforts to maintain excellent library collections.
Citizens who object to the book's removal will be provided an opportunity to appeal my decision to the Board of Directors. These matters are difficult, and I understand that there will be a wide range of opinions as to the best action to take. I will be glad to answer
any additional questions you may have. patti.
MY RESPONSE
Thank you for your letter. And while I do respect your desire to keep kids safe, you miss the point. Gay teens USE gay chat rooms, in large part, BECAUSE they are disenfranchised at school and in their communities. By removing this book -- an alternative to gay chat rooms -- you push them further to that end. Your effort is counter-productive.
In addition, if you've read the book, you know Brent's character is EXTREMELY cautious about meeting this person. If you hadn't given in to the fear of a minority -- two parents who, I'm told, were more concerned with "turning kids gay," than the 'Net -- you could have used the book as a tool to communicate the dangers with kids in your school, along with
tolerance for their gay and lesbian classmates.
Censorship is not the answer to battling the dangers our children face. Knowledge is the answer. Empowerment. Abducted children most often die at the hands of predators AND silence. We don't tell out kids how to protect themselves, so when danger presents, they are caught unprepared. "Be quiet, or I'll kill you," is the war cry of these animals. And you just told the kids silence is golden. We should be telling them to cry out for the help they need.
Banning a book that might encourage free discussion about these very real dangers in a child's life simply propagates a myth -- that by pretending bad things don't happen, we remove our innocents from their reach. Ask any parent that's lost a child to these dangers what they wish for most, beyond the lives of their children renewed, and they'll tell you they wish they'd TALKED to their kids -- WARNED them. That's hard to do with our heads buried deep in the sand.
Please do not pander to fear and prejudice -- to two voices who may not be pure in their motivation. Please reach for the greater wisdom and empower your students, rather than shielding them from the very things that will make them safer. Educate. Don't censor.
Kelly Milner Halls
MS BANKS RESPONSE
November 22, 2005
Kelly--this whole conversation has been cast in a context I never intended, but should have anticipated. I don't, for the record, believe for a second that kids are "turned gay" anymore than they're "turned blue-eyed." Thank you for your thoughts, truly, they give me pause. At some point, though, we have to find a way to parse out 'age appropriateness' and the issue of how school libraries differ from public libraries generally, if in fact they do/should and who should decide.
Anyhow, thanks again for sharing your thoughts in an open-hearted manner; they've not fallen on deaf ears. patti.
|
|
|
|
| | |
AVIDD's Montgomery County, Texas Agenda
I'm not sure how I missed this dangerous development in the suburbs of Houston, Texas, but I'll correct that mistake now. this instant.
According to American Libraries Online, Jim Cabaniss who heads up the American Veterans in Defense of Democracy joined 14 other protesters on October 8, 2005 to go from branch library to branch library shredding "pornographic" books from a list 70 strong -- books they want banned.
Library Director Jerilynn A. Williams has wrangled with Cabaniss and the Library Patrons of Texas (http://www.librarypatrons.org/) before. In fact, in 2003 a Mongomery County official allegedly faced criminal charges for trying to help secretly overturn the library selection policies to support the extreme conservative agenda. But Williams remains determined to fight the chronic assaults on free speech and the right to read.
Many of the books targeted by AVIDD reflect gay and lesbian characters in a positive light. Erin Myers of the Democrat Herald said, "AVIDD's true agenda became glaringly obvious when Cabaniss said that the books were put in the library by a gay, lesbian and transgendered task force devoted to spreading their lifestyle to others. He said, 'This group represents only one percent of the American people and they are deciding what goes into our libraries.' “
Though it hasn't been authenticated, this is allegedly a partial list of books drawn from the 70 the AVIDD wants banned, along with the reasons sighted for removal:
•Dance on My Grave Aidan Chambers: sexual content, profanity
•Dreamland Sarah Dessen: profanity, sexual situations
•The Drowning of Stephen Jones Bette Green: ultra-liberal, anti-Christian, bad language, unsuitable
•Eight Seconds Jean Ferris: reprobate way of life
•Geography Club Brent Hartinger: profanity, sexual situations
•Good Moon Rising Nancy Garden: homosexuality
•Hey, Dollface Deborah Hautzig: language, discussion of homosexuality without declaring it a sin
•Holly's Secret Nancy Garden: propaganda methods too subtle for readers and hidden assumptions regarding homosexuality
•I Am Joseph Barbara Cohen: much too graphic, unacceptable for a family
•Ironman Chris Cruthcher: vulgar language, sexual promiscuity, homosexuality
•My Brother Has AIDS Deborah Davis: portrayal of dysfunctional family, nothing is mentioned about the fact that if Lincoln or Jack had not chosen a gay lifestyle they would not have contracted AIDS, religion is excluded as solution
•My Father's Scar Michael Cart: homosexual lifestyle, portrayal of superficial relationship as love, language
•My Heartbeat Garrett Freymann-Wehr: recounts the confusion of three young people and their newly emerging sexual feelings and identity
•Peter Kate Walker: replete with titillation, is demeaning and panders to the lowest side of life
•The Sissy Duckling Harvey Fierstein: author pushing homosexual agenda
•Stuck Rubber Baby Howard Cruse: vulgar, obscene graphics, inflammatory racial words and graphics, homosexual practices
•Tomorrow Wendy Shelly Stoehr: introduces young people to subjects with no moral judgment attached
•What I Know Now Rodger Larson: profanity, explicit sexual references
For a list of books targeted by the Library Patrons of Texas, CLICK HERE. |
|
|
|
LAURIE TAYLOR UPDATE
Laurie Taylor lost her battle with the Fayetteville school board and free thinking Americans won. It isn't that I don't support her right to choose books for her own children. I do. But she has no right to make that decision for other parents. She'll no doubt appeal. But for now, freedom of speech has been afforded the respect it deserves.
PRESS COVERAGE
Sept. 27 -- The citizens of the State of Arkansas, and the citizens of Fayetteville, particularly, should now be asking themselves, "What is the connection between State Senator Jim Holt and Laurie Taylor, the Fayetteville Public School District patron charging that the Fayetteville High School Library contains books that have 'pornographic' content?"
The answer is: the upcoming Arkansas Governor's election....
Oct. 5 -- In its findings, the eightmember committee wrote, "Although the book, ‘Push’ may not be suitable for every high school student, it does have literary merit and should remain in the library." This is in accordance with the district’s policy that library should offer books with a "diversity of appeal, and presentation of different points of view." "I think it’s sad," Taylor said, regarding the committee’s recommendation.
Oct. 7 -- The novel Push will remain on the library shelves at Fayetteville (Ark.) High School, a materials review committee ruled in late September. The decision was in response to a challenge filed in August by parent Laurie Taylor, who began waging a campaign last spring to restrict books she considers objectionable from schoolchildren.
|
|
|
Denver Update
August 24, 2005
From the Denver Public Library website:
REPORT ON COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICY
AND REVIEW OF FOTONOVELAS
By means of media reports, the Denver Public Library has received complaints regarding its collection of fotonovelas. The complaints centered on the depiction of nudity, sexual content, and violence against women. Additional complaints concerned access minors may have to this material. Although a formal Request for Reconsideration has not been received, the Library has reviewed the material.
We have reviewed the material following the guidelines set forth in the Collection Development Policy. We have considered the context of the collection, the audience for which it is intended, and the Library’s mission.
The Library purchases fotonovelas through subscriptions to series, much like magazine subscriptions. The Library catalog lists 6569 fotonovela items from fourteen series. On August 4 staff pulled all fotonovelas currently on the shelves and sent them to the Collection Development Office. As of August 11, the Collection Development Office has received 2276 items and reviewed over 400 items.
After careful review, the Library staff has determined that the subject content of any single item is within the guidelines of the Collection Development Policy. The visual nature of single items is likewise within the guidelines of the policy. The placement of the material in adult areas of the Library buildings is also consistent with the policy. However, in looking at each series as a whole, staff has determined that four of the fourteen series are inappropriate for the collection because of their consistent portrayal of sexually explicit content. The difference is between specific items and subscriptions.
Therefore, the Library intends to cancel the subscriptions to El libro vaquero (Cowboy Book), Frontera Violenta (Violent Frontier), La novela policiaca (Police Novel), and El libro policiaco (Police Book). The remaining ten series will be returned to the shelves |
|
|
SIX THOUSAND BOOKS?
Yup. That's how many Spanish language graphic novels were stripped from the shelves of the Denver Public Library system with one wave of the ultra-conservative wand, according to an August 12 article in the Denver Post. The power of fear can be sweeping.
It's tough from a distance to determine how this all got started. But it seems conservative 630 KHOW talk show host Peter Boyles at least helped it pick up a little steam, by alerting his listeners to the growing number of Spanish language titles offered at the Denver Public Library branches.
In a letter to John Hickenlooper, the Mayor of Denver, posted on Boyle's website, "Member of Congress" Tom Tancredo poses twelve "fact-based" questions for anonymous DPL staffers. They can't reveal themselves, Tancredo says, because they fear they'll be fired. All twelve questions are openly posted. Three are sampled here.
Question #1: "Is the Denver Public Library implementing a plan to convert very large sections of several branch libraries – ranging from 10% to 62% of book and periodical holdings -- to Spanish language holdings?"
Question #10: "Is a Mexican Driver’s License now accepted in city libraries as valid ID for use of library facilities and services? Are driver’s licenses from other nations also accepted?"
Question #12: "Is DPL assisting 'undocumented' (illegal) aliens in purchasing homes through sponsorship of workshops for undocumented aliens in cooperation with the Colorado Housing Assistance Corporation? Does DPL make any distinction between legal and illegal residents in providing its taxpayer-funded services?"
That letter and others, along with on-air discussions helped lead to the mass removal of graphic novels provided as a legitimate service for Spanish speaking citizens of Denver.
And remember, according to the National Association for Multi-ethnicity in Communications and the 2000 US Census, "Hispanics will constitute one-quarter of the U.S. Population by 2010-- earlier than projected by the '90 Census." That's 1/4 of the tax base paying for public library materials by 2010, too.
The same August 12 Denver Post article says, "Officials of the city's system ... are worried that a full review of its 2.5 million books, CDs and videos may follow." A valid concern, I'd say. Give in to ignorance, and ignorance is emboldened.
Is this challenge really about books or is it about immigration? Is it aimed at protecting the people of Denver, or at discouraging Spanish speaking American's from feeling too at home in the land they also love?
Like the questions in Tom Tancredo's pointed letter, these questions will have to wait for serious answers. But racism should be more obscene to true patriots than any book pulled from any American library shelf. Fair minded people of every political bent should pay close attention to this developing controversy, and commit to defending our melting pot liberties against every enemy -- even those who threaten freedom from within. |
|
|
Laurie Taylor's Notes
Laurie Taylor emailed on August 1 to clarify her goals in Fayetteville. She said:
"I have been told by several opposing people just to restrict my children from this material, and I would love to, except I do not know what all is there (it is not separated, marked or identified in any way).
"...how do you recommend I impose restrictions on my child in a library I pay for, in a school I pay for and support outside of taxes financially and with my time volunteering for everything that comes down the pike?
"Why would any rational person have a problem with a parent having knowledge and giving consent for their own child to access “adult” literature? God sent me my children also, and He expects me to protect them from harmful things, even when it is not popular or if some feel it is educational.
"I support you making your own decisions, I did stand up personally to defend your free speech by serving this country in a time of war so that all American’s keep their inalienable rights, and I would appreciate it if I could keep mine."
I didn't answer because I didn't think she would listen. I still don't. But she wrote again on August 13th, saying:
"I have not heard back from you and I have noticed that you have not yet clarified on your sight that I do not advocate banning, nor did you mention the information that I gave you on the restrictions placed on parents like me who do not want their children to access this material. I am wondering if you will set the record straight and inform your readers of my true intent instead of having them continue to believe what you know to not be true?"
So I guess I'll give it a whirl, though I'm fairly sure Laurie's not REALLY interested in what I have to say.
I know, as a mother, that it can be hard to stay on top of what your kids do and say and hear and witness, at least after they enter public school. Every parent wonders if they've successfully instilled in their children the values they hold most dear as they begin to developmentally move away from the safety of the nest.
But the only way you CAN be sure they understand what you believe and why you believe it is to communicate. The best communication venue, in my opinion, is the honest discussion of topics and challenges that present themselves in everyday life.
When my daughter was little, Michael Jackon's THRILLER video hit the airwaves, and parents screamed foul. "It's too intense for my children," they said. In a television instant, kids were forbidden access to MTV, for well intentioned reasons. That's not what I chose to do.
I decided to sit down WITH my kids to watch THRILLER. And we talked together about how it made us feel. My influence, in that moment, became far more powerful than Michael Jackson's or MTV's. Because I am the guide my children turn to as they consider ideals. I have followed the same path on topics as tough as teen pregnancy, abortion, religion, shoplifting, drug abuse, drunk driving, the whole spectrum. I decided I'd rather my kids knew they could talk to me about those tough things, so I stood right beside them as they subjects arose. We talked. They understood.
Laurie Taylor's parenting choices are different. She thinks shielding her kids from real issues in real life -- pretending those things don't exist -- will protect them. I can't agree with her choice. In fact, I think her kids will be helplessly ignorant when they DO leave her "protective bubble" and land in dangerous real world unprepared. But I defend her right to make that choice. What I can't defend is her desire to shield MY children along with hers. That takes my options away from me.
As for her comment about paying taxes...guess what? We ALL pay taxes. You may have paid for the G rated books in the library, but I paid for the others with money just as hard won. So my opinon is JUST as valid as yours. Take that one off the table.
Back to book banning. Laurie wants us to believe what she's doing isn't censorship. She may even believe that herself. But it is. Restricting access to book based on personal preferences IS censorship. Period. So says the Supreme Court. She also says because she can't be EVERYWHERE, see EVERYTHING, we should help her enforce her rules by putting certain books out of reach. But that's not OUR job. It's hers. She signed on for it the day she took on the title of "Mother."
If Laurie Taylor really thinks her kids shouldn't see the books in a public school library -- books that MUST represent the interests of ALL families, not just families LIKE HERS -- she should consider home schooling, or enrolling her kids in a private, religious school. She should lobby to start a magnet school with her goals clearly defined and funded. But taking away books I might not mind my kids seeing, just because SHE doesn't like them is censorship. So emails or not, I am still passionately opposed.
I am also confused by her statement about her service in the Gulf War. I tip my hat to her, and thank her for that dedication. But accepting a job that requires defending this nation's freedom -- ALL citizens, not just those who agree with her ideology -- doesn't entitle Laurie Taylor to be a censor -- except in her own HOME. |
|
|
Smothering Mothering
in Arkansas
Everytime I think I've seen it all when it comes to evangelical intrusion and "freedom," someone wanders along to prove new heights in hypocracy are within reach.
Fayetteville mother of five Laurie Taylor gets my brown star of the month for her quest to rid her school district of all literature she deems "inappropriate." How did she begin her weeding? With a two word search phrase. "Sex" and "Homosexual," according to newspaper reports.
Truth is, she started by challenging three books last fall. It's So Amazing, It's Perfectly Normal, and The Teenage Guy's Survival Guide. She called them vulgar and demanded they be placed on a "parents only," shelf restricted from those impressionable little high school hands.
Unfortunately, she won. Superintendent Dr. Bobby New of the Fayetteville School District gave in to her hysterics and the books were removed.
Flanked and fueled by radio talk show minister E.W. Throckmorton , she's now compiling a new, comprehensive list of "bad" books. She originally said it would be 70 titles long. Now she's expecting to challenge as many as 170, according to one
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
. A partial list of 54 will be included at the bottom of this report. She won't release the whole list until she and the Rev[erend] are sure all the filth is included.
The National Coalition Against Censorship joined the battle by sending Bobby New a powerful letter, explaining what he no doubt already knows -- the slippery slope to oppressive censorship begins with a single banned book. I wonder if Bobby New wishes he could turn back time and Taylor?
The American Library Association is also watching the case closely.
In a heroic twist, the North West edition of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette published a brilliant editorial July 24, 2005 bashing Taylor's desire to "mother" all students in Fayetteville instead of focusing on ONLY her own. But who knows how the story will end? Who knows if we'll even have the freedom to read about it?
To be continued... |
|
|
MRS. KETTE OBJECTS
On July 31, 2005 I received this email from Mrs. Emilia Rosa Kette, and I think she asks an interesting and valid question.
Mrs/Miss Miner:
Censor Alert?! Let us talk about censorship, shall we? How many books on ABSTINENCE do your Public Library and Public School have? Now, kindly answer: WHO'S DOING THE CENSORING?
Mrs. Emilia Rosa Kette (from Flyover Country)
So I turned to about 1,200 public and school librarians for an answer. MANY terrific experts from all over the country offered suggestions, and I thank them all. The compiled, alphabetical list is below. Clearly, there is no shortage of options and MANY are shelved in every region.
NONFICTION BOOKS
Abstinence by Dale Zevin
Abstinence : health facts by Netha L. Thacker and Kathleen R. Miner
Abstinence makes the heart grow fonder by Carole Marsh
Abstinence: Postponing Sexual Involvement by Judith Peacock
Against the Tide : How to Raise Sexually Pure Kids… by Tim and Beverly LaHaye
An Analysis of Premarital Purity in the Song of Songs by Thomas Kern Oberholtzer
Because We Love Them: Fostering Christian Sexuality…by Sheree Whitters Havlik
Come Clean; It’s a Pure Revolution by Doug Herman
Everything You Need to Know About Sexual Abstinence by Barbara Moe
Everything You Need to Know About Virginity by Michael A. Sommers
Every Young Man’s Battle: Strategies for Victory in the Real World of Sexual Temptation by Stephen Arterburn
Facing the Facts: The Truth About Sex and You
Gift-wrapped by God : Secret Answers to the Question, "Why Wait?" by Linda Dillow and Lorraine Pintus
I Don't Want Your Sex for Now by Miles McPherson
Into Adolescence. Choosing Abstinence: A Curriculum for Grades 5-8 by Dale Zevin
It’s Okay to Say No: Choosing Sexual Abstinence by Eleanor Ayers
Keeping Your Kids Sexually Pure…by La Verne Tolbert
Love, Sex and God by Bill Ameiss and Jane Graver
Loving with Chastity: Helping Teenagers Make Choices about Chastity by Marcy Derfus
No Apologies: The Truth About Life, Love & Sex (book and video)
Pure Excitement: a Radical Righteous Approach to Sex, Love and Dating
Pure Love by Jason Evert
Purity Under Pressure by Neil T. Anderson and Dave Park
Removing the Risk: Abstinence for High School Students by Richard P. Barth and Nancy Abbey
Removing the Risk. Student Workbook by Richard P. Barth
Sex Can Wait: an Abstinence-Based Sexuality Curriculum by Pennie Core-Gebhart
Sex Education: an Islamic Perspective edited by Shahid Athar
Sex Has a Price Tag … by Pam Stenzel
SexSmart: 501 Reasons to Hold Off on Sex by Susan Browning Pogany
Standing with Courage: Confronting Tough Decisions about Sex by Mary L. Kurey
The New Celibacy: A Journey to Love, Intimacy and Good Health by Gabrielle Brown
The New Positive Images: Teaching Abstinence, Contraception & Sexual Health by Peggy Brick
The Purity Principle by Randy Alcorn
The Power of Abstinence
Time for a Pure Revolution by Doug Herman
True Love Waits compiled by Mark DeVries
Wait for Me: Rediscovering the Joy of Purity in Romance
What Hollywood Won’t Tell You About Sex, Love and Dating
What’s the Big Deal About Sex: Loving God’s Way
Who Moved the Goalpost? 7 Winning Strategies in the Sexual Integrity Game Plan
Why Say No When the Hormones Say Go?
Worth Waiting For: Sexual Abstinence Before Marriage by Brent A. Barlow
Yes You Can! A Guide for Sexuality Education that Affirms Abstinence… Editor, Dorothy L. Williams
NONFICTION VIDEOS
Abstinence – It’s the Right Choice
Love is Patient: Saving Sex for Marriage
No Apologies: The Truth about Life, Love & Sex/Focus on the Family
Pamela's Prayer (may be fiction)
Real People – Sex too Soon
Real Sex: The Naked Truth About Chastity
Searching for True Love
Sex: Everyone’s Doing It – NOT!
Sex, Lies & The Truth
Teen Relationships and Sexual Pressue
The Myth of Safe Sex
FICTION
If You Loved Me by Marilyn Reynolds
The V Club by Kate Brian
With This Ring by Robin Jones Gunn |
|
|
Partial List of Taylor's BAD BOOKS
." Beloved" by Toni Morrison
. "Snow falling on cedars" by David Guterson.
." Song of Solomon" by Toni Morrison
. "Doing It"by Melvin Burgess
." Choke"by Palahniuk
. "Between Lovers"by Eric Jerome Dickey
." CHEATERS"by Eric Jerome Dickey
. "The Other Woman"by Eric Jerome Dickey.
." The Homo Handbook - Getting In Touch With Your Inner Homo"by Judy Carter
. "Gays/justice: A study of ethics, society, and law" by Richard D. Mohr.
. "Coming Out in College: The struggle for a queer identity" by Robert A. Rhoads
. "GLBTQ: The survival guide for queer & questioning teens" by Kelly Huegel
. "Rainbow Boys"by Alex Sanchez
." Am I Blue? Coming Out From the Silence"by Marion Dane Bauer
. "Forever"by Judy Blume
." Kissing Kate"by Lauren Myracle
. "Children of Horizons"by Gilbert Herdt
." Family Values: Two Moms and Their Son"by Phyllis Burke
. "Eight Seconds"by Jean Ferris
." Annie On My Mind"by Nancy Garden
. "BABY BE-BOP"by Francesca Lia Block
." Leave Myself Behind"by Bart Yates
. Always running: La Vida Loca, gang days in L. A. "by Luis J. Rodriguez
." Bless me, Ultima"by Rudolfo Anaya
. "Breaking boxes"by A. M. Jenkins.
." Chronicle of a death foretold"by Gabriel Garcia Marquez
. "Deal with it! A whole new approach to your body, brain, and life as a gurl"by Esther Drill, Heather McDonald, Rebecca Odes.
." Druids"by Morgan Llywelyn
. "Fade"by Robert Cormier
." Fair game"by Erika Tamar.
. "Fallen angels"by Walter Dean Myers
." Fools Crow"by James Welch
. "Girl Goddess #9: nine stories"by Francesca Lia Block
." How the Garcia girls lost their accents"by Julia Alvarez.
. "I was a teenage fairy"by Francesca Lia Block.
." Less than zero"by Ellis
. "Like water for chocolate: A novel in monthly installments with recipes, romances and home remedies"by Laura Esquivel
." Love in the time of cholera"by Gabriel Garcia Marquez
. "Lucky"by Alice Sebold.
." My father's scar"by Michael Cart.
. "My heartbeat"by Garret Freymann-Weyr.
." One hot second: stories about desire"edited by Cathy Young.
. "One hundred years of solitude"by Gabriel García Márquez
." Paula"by Isabel Allende
. "Peter"by Kate Walker
." Push: a novel"by Sapphire
. "Ragtime"by E. L. Doctorow.
." Rats saw God"by Rob Thomas.
. "Tenderness"by Robert Cormier.
." The bluest eye"by Toni Morrison
. "The perks of being a wallflower"by Stephen Chbosky
." The Pillars of the earth"by Ken Follett
. "The rose and the beast: fairy tales" retold by Francesca Lia Block she said. |
|
|
TEENS VS CHILDREN
A LIBRARIAN IN CONNECTICUT WRITES:
"From what I can see of the list of books posted, many of them (e.g. BELOVED, SONG OF SOLOMON, LUCKY, LIKE WATER FOR CHOCOLATE) are adult books. While they may be part of a high school's library, or included in a Teen collection, they would not be a part of any library's Juvenile collection.
"Libraries that have a Teen area/collection are acknowledging that *teens* have different needs, interests, and maturity levels from *children*. They also realize that older teens have different needs, interests, and maturity levels than younger teens, and that all teens have the right to have those needs and interests met.
"Are these people considering high school juniors and seniors children? Webster's Third New International Dictionary defines "child" as "a young person of either sex...especially between infancy and youth". And "youth" is defined as "between adolescence and the age of maturity".
"Teens aren't children and shouldn't be treated as such." |
|
|
|
| | |
MICHIGAN FAMILIES BATTLE
-- FOR THE RIGHT TO READ
Will a PAC group successfully stack the Rochester, Michigan school board with book banners? It's possible, according to one anonymous sources. And review of independent bookseller Cammie Mannino's battles against censorship suggests the source could be right.
The sitting Rochester school board asked Mannino, owner of Halfway Down the Stairs and a board member of the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression (ABFFE) to consult on a rash of book challenges -- four in six weeks. Mounted by a "concerned parents" group now known as Rochester 20-20, the challenges questioned the value of MONSTER by Walter Dean Myers, SPEAK by Laurie Halse Anderson, THE SHADOW CLUB by Neal Shusterman and PUSH by Sapphire.
Parent Wendy Waszkiewicz mounted the first challenge after her 14-year-old son was given the option to read MONSTER by Myers in middle school. When he started asking questions about prison life, Waszkiewicz grew concerned. "The more my son talked about it," she said in the Detroit News, "the more concerned I grew about what they were reading."
But in Rochester School Board meeting minutes, representatives from the school made it crystal clear all reading selections were OPTIONAL. Waszkiewicz's son could have selected a different book.
Even so, Waszkiewicz took her concerns to the review committee and the board, which voted 4 to 3 to support the use of MONSTER as a reading option. Unhappy with that decision, Waszkiewicz, Carolyn Mack and other parent recruits continued to challenge other books and other parents' rights to determin what's best for THEIR children, on their own.
Two board seats are up for re-election in 2005, and sources say Rochester 20-20 will "invest" in the outcome to benefit their hand selected candidates Donald Patterson and Konni Behounec.
In an article by David Grogan in the ABA's Bookselling This Week, Mannino summed up her concerns, and mine, quite succinctly. "I support the right of parents to have control over what their children read -- I have a problem with people telling other children what to read. I want to be respectful of people's concerns, but compassionate about the freedom to read."
Please, Rochester, Michigan -- let your voices be heard. Do not let school policy and your God-given right to free agency be hijacked by people who will only defend the freedom of people like them. Safeguard your options. Demand your child's individual right to read. Demand your parental right to steward YOUR way, not theirs.
|
|
|
More about Rochester 20-20
Rochester Eccentric, March 20, 2005
Watchdogs have vision for school district Newly formed Rochester 20_20 calls for reform, openness
|
| Bob Sharp says Rochester 20_20, a new school board watchdog group he helms, runs a gamut of members, issues and concerns.
Just because Carolyn Mack, an outspoken critic of some secondary school reading books, is group secretary, that doesn't mean all members share her views, Sharp said.
They may not find themselves on the same page with 20_20 vice president, Chuck Stouffer, on some issues. Or with Sharp's opinions on school finances and no-bid contracts.
"Just as school districts are non-partisan, so are we. Some may try to characterize us as a minority or fringe group, but we're diverse," Sharp stressed.
"Some of us care a great deal about fiscal responsibility. Others might have concerns about the way curriculum is being addressed. We come with a wide range of cares and concerns. We're not a one-issue group."
But Sharp says no matter what issue motivates residents to join Rochester 20_20, he suspects they all seek a greater voice in a more responsive, open local school district.
A similar group, Bloomfield 20_20, organized last year in Bloomfield Hills and was instrumental in stopping a plan to combine two high schools in the district. It also endorsed candidates who won school board seats.
Other 20_20 groups - one in Royal Oak and one in Farmington - are currently forming.
About 40 residents have volunteered to become active in Rochester 20_20. Sharp, who lost a bid for the Rochester school board last year, says there are no "card-carrying" members.
He hopes even more will attend a public meeting from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., today, March 20, at River Crest Banquet Hall, located on Avon just east of Livernois in Rochester Hills.
"We'd expect people to come in and out and not stay the entire time," Sharp noted.
The group will make a slide presentation twice during the two-hour period, detailing what it plans to accomplish and how.
A few goals:
Endorsing candidates in the upcoming school board election.
Creating a "strong" school board that leads rather than "reacts" to administrative recommendations.
Improved "fiscal discipline" including elimination of "no bid" contracts.
A chance to ask follow-up questions at board meetings and to receive information or answers in a timely fashion.
Stronger curriculum.
Including the community in the search for a new superintendent.
Measurable goals for administrators.
Michelle Shepherd, one of two incumbents in the Rochester school board race, said Rochester 20_20 hasn't contacted her regarding her views or resume.
"The usual procedure when a group looks to endorse a candidate is to set up interviews and submit a list of questions," Shepherd said. "And come to a consensus and decide who to endorse."
Sharp said Rochester 20_20 can "look at the two incumbents and make a good evaluation of their track record."
"As far as the other two candidates, we'll have to discuss key issues with them and see if there's a fit," Sharp said.
Shepherd said she had heard about Bloomfield 20_20 and was aware of the new Rochester group, but wasn't invited to the meeting on Sunday.
"There has not been an attempt to communicate with me," she said. "They're all about strong curriculum and parent involvement? Then it seems we should agree on the direction the district has taken."
She said technology, parent involvement, and curriculum has improved during her tenure.
"If that is what the group is promoting, then we should be in agreement," Shepherd said.
But Sharp pointed out that the district has cut some of its strong classes, such as Atlas, a general studies program with an international bent at Adams High School.
"They saved a trifling amount of money and eliminated it," he said.
Sharp, who has taught after-school science classes at the middle school level, said he first became involved in a school issue when the district eliminated a biannual student trip to Germany.
"I had campaigned to reinstate the field-trip policy. I saw what it takes to get a fair hearing" from the board, Sharp said.
He said too many people go before the board with questions and concerns but were "stonewalled" or frustrated in their attempts to obtain information.
"At the same time, we've seen the success of the 20_20 organization in Bloomfield Hills," he noted. "All of the superintendents in Oakland County belong to a group that gets together on a regular basis. Why shouldn't citizens who have concerns work collaboratively?" | |
|
|
|
| | |
Have you heard of them? Knoxville, Iowa librarian Jan Behrens certainly has. A patron who claimed to be a supporter defaced a copy of Scientific American magazine, calling an unclothed illustration of a prehistoric woman "pornographic." He also blamed the library staff for not protecting children from "filth."
In the March 11, 2005 Journal-Express Ms. Behrens addressed the complaint this way:
To the editor:
I would like to respond to Mr. McSpadden's misinformed understanding of a public library and what it provides to the citizens of the community.
A librarian's responsibility is to select a wide variety of materials in various genres to meet the educational and recreational needs of people in the community. We have fiction and non-fiction books for children, teens and adults; magazines appropriate for various ages; books on tape and on CD for both children and adults; and videos and DVDs for both children and adults. We do not have pornography. Some items are more appropriate for adults than for children and are shelved downstairs in the adult section.
A parent's responsibility is to monitor what his/her own children are reading or watching and to determine what is appropriate for his/her own children. If a child checks out something the parent deems inappropriate, the parent has the right to take it away and return it to the library. No one has the right to censor materials through an act of vandalism, making the material unusable to others in the community.
Neither Scientific American magazine nor Psychology Today, a magazine Mr. McSpadden complained about previously, can, by any stretch of the imagination, be construed to be pornographic. They are both informative, scientific magazines written so that the persons who are not scientists can understand them.
A public library is a place people may continue learning throughout their lives. One of the great advantages of living in the United States of America is the opportunity to stretch our minds by reading what we want to read, not just what someone else thinks is okay for us to read. During the "Cultural Revolution" of 1966-76 in China, all books written by authors from western countries were destroyed. The only books allowed to remain were books written by or agreeing with Chairman Mao. Intellectuals such as university professors, doctors, lawyers, etc., were thrown into prison if they dared to disagree with Chairman Mao.
Ideas, and the right to read the ideas of others, will keep us free.
But on March 15, Ms. Behrens received an email from Dan Kleinman -- who founded “Plan2Succeed” -- that seemed to support of this vandalism. Mr. Kleinman has sense corrected me, saying he never called the magazine pornographic, and I believe him. I apologize for the misunderstanding. But I fear his website does encourage this kind of behavior.
I once called them Mr. Kleinman's group "hateful" and I think I was wrong. As I said, we have exchanged emails, and I believe his desire to keep children safe is real. But I cannot agree with the tactics he uses. So while I support his right to express himself, completely, I cannot support the claims he makes against the American Library Association or his call to remove "pornographic" books when they are not in fact pornographic.
Public libraries are there for ALL Americans, not just those who agree with Mr. Kleinman. So I still encourage freedom loving citizens to resist this kind of censorship. Fight for your right to read and parent by your own convictions. |
|
|
More about PLAN TO SUCCEED and Dan Kleinman.
| 09/22/2004 |
| Library board OKs filters for computers |
|
|
By PATRICIA LLERENA LONG HILL TWP – The Library Board of Trustees unanimously voted at a Wednesday, Sept. 15 meeting, to install Internet filters on all of the computers in the children’s department and some in the adult section, once the public library moves to its new location at the end of the year.
The board reached this decision after about two years worth of discussion and public commentary.
“This has been a painful process,” said Board President Donald Kuhn.
Board members Lynette Schneider and Jerry Klawitter will draft a new policy to implement this decision and present it at next month’s meeting on Wednesday, Oct. 20.
The new policy will require children, under the age of 18, to receive parental permission to use unfiltered computers in the adult section.
Several board members said the problem will be finding a way to implement this new policy in a way that is not burdensome for the library staff.
Board member Jerry Klawitter said one option is to use two different color-coded cards to distinguish the minors who are not allowed to use the unfiltered computers,
The library’s Internet policy holds the parents responsible for the information their children access on the Internet.
In the policy, parents are advised that “children who use the Internet unsupervised may be exposed to inappropriate or disturbing information and images.”
Parents’ Fears
About 20 parents, mostly fathers fearing their children could be inadvertently exposed to pornography at the library, addressed the board members.
Many referred to offensive pop up windows that could appear after another user has accessed pornographic information.
Cyberporn “is as addictive as crack cocaine,” said Karl Schlegel, of Stirling.
“The library is not an appropriate place for hard-core graphic pornography,” said John Moser of Gillette.
“The stuff we don’t get (because of the filters)…we don’t need to be looking at anyway,” said Bill Ross, of Gillette.
“We’re providing free public access to the Internet. If someone has those (pornographic) interests, they should do it at their own expense,” said Jim Minogue of Stirling, the father of seven children.
“If the library trustees don’t normally allow pornographic books and magazines on the shelves, why allow pornography to come in through the Internet?” asked Mark Williams of Gillette.
“I think if the town was polled, you would find an overwhelming majority in support of filtering,” Williams said.
Steve Delia of Stirling said filtering is not censorship.
Delia suggested satisfying pro-filtering and anti-filtering sentiments by installing filters on all the computers, which could be turned off at the request of the user, no questions asked.
“We’ve already had one arrest,” said Delia’s wife, Eileen. “Why does the board think this won’t happen again?”
“I’m afraid for my children,” she said.
In May 2001, a township man was arrested for viewing child pornography at the library. He was found guilty and sentenced to jail time on Sept. 21, 2001.
“I think the fears that have been expressed (tonight) are overblown, said Dan Kahn of Gillette. “There are always risks in life. I’m willing to take this very minor risk with my kids.”
‘Filtering Is Censorship’
All the board members said they did not want pornography in the library and most said they would not vote for filtering all of the library’s computers.
They also praised the library staff for doing an excellent job in monitoring the computer use and handling the instances when people view inappropriate Web sites.
Library Director Arline Most said during a Friday, Sept. 17, phone interview that the library staff rarely has to stop people from looking at inappropriate Web sites.
Once in a blue moon, she said, the staff may see a young adolescent male at a computer in the children’s section, and it’s obvious from his body language that he knows he’s doing something wrong.
In those instances, a staff member tells the individual to stop looking at the inappropriate material and the adolescent is embarrassed, she added.
“We seldom have this problem…because (the computers) are so visible,” Most said.
“We’re not doing anything actively to bring pornography to the library,” said board member Bryan Boylan, chair of the committee that created the library board’s report on filtering Internet access.
“I feel filtering is censorship, even if it can be turned off,” Boylan added.
There is no Supreme Court decision that says filtering is OK by itself, Boylan said. The decision only refers to cases that have to do with funding, he added.
The Supreme Court upheld the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) in June. The law requires that libraries receiving federal funding for Internet service must install filters on all computers, as long as they are disabled at the request of an adult patron.
Since the township’s library does not receive this federal funding, the board is not legally obliged to filter the computers.
‘Tyranny Of The Minority’
Schools Superintendent Arthur DiBenedetto attended the meeting to react to past comments made by Dan Kleinman of Gillette. Kleinman supports filtering all of the library’s computers and is critical of the American Library Association (ALA), which challenged the constitutionality of CIPA.
“My own child was given a pornographic book on the fourth day of kindergarten in public school. I was told the public school librarian gave it to her because it was on the ALA list of books. The principal had it removed from the library saying it was twice as inappropriate as what I reported,” Kleinman said in an email.
DiBenedeto referred to this email at the meeting, which was distributed by Kleinman on Tuesday, Sept. 7 to members of the press, community leaders and township employees.
Kleinman was not present at the meeting.
“Our librarians are extremely professional and ethical people,” DiBenedetto said. “They would never put a pornographic book on the library’s shelves.”
The superintendent said he, the principal and librarian reviewed the award-winning book, “Mangaboom,” by Charlotte Pomerantz, and decided to keep it on the shelves.
“It’s a little bit different,” DiBenedetto said. The book’s content is based on the Puerto Rican culture and makes reference to skinny-dipping. DiBenedetto said he could “understand (why) some people may find it (the content) objectionable.”
The superintendent said he considered Kleinman’s remarks “nearly slanderous against our librarian and principal.”
“You are constantly faced (with) strong opinions put forth by a minority group,’’ ’DiBenedetto said to the board members, speaking from his own experience as a non-voting member of the Board of Education.
“It’s a tyranny of the minority,” DiBenedetto said.
David Kaplan of Gillette said he visited Kleinman’s Web site www.plan2succeed.org , and found links to lists of books that should be banned.
The books were deemed pornographic because of small passages within the context of the stories, which relate to the real world, Kaplan said.
“Most of the issues (brought up by) this gentleman (Kleinman) are overblown,” Kaplan said.
“I don’t think censoring (Internet access) is any different from censoring books,” Kaplan said.
Dan McGuire of Stirling said he was dismayed at how “the crusade of a single zealot” could consume the community’s time.
“This entire crusade of one person was inspired by his conclusion that a kindergarten book was pornographic,” McGuire said. Kleinman’s definition of pornography is wildly exaggerated, he said.
McGuire urged the community to respect whatever decision the board reached that night.
“The chances of something inappropriate happening in our library (are) relatively slim,” Kleinman said during a Friday, Sept. 17 interview. “But, who wants to take the chance?”
“It’s only a matter of time before some child gets injured because our librarians are following the ALA (guidelines)” Kleinman said.
Kleinman said he began to investigate the public library and found a link to a Web site which he deemed pornographic.
The Web site, a health question-and-answer service called “Go Ask Alice,” was created by officials from Columbia University in New York. The link has since been removed.
In response to an argument that computer filters are not perfect and block constitutionally protected information, Kleinman said, “All you have to do is ask to turn off the filters…that’s not censorship.
“Homeland Security will never be perfect in this country,” he added, “but we’re still trying.” | |
|
|
 | | By Charlotte Pomerantz, illustrated by Anita Lobel, published by Greenwillow Books, an imprint of HarperCollins in April of 1997. |
|
| | |
The "pornographic" picture book...
MANGABOOM |
|
|
Kleinman's Letter to Me
April 4, 1005
Dear Ms. Halls,
Hello. I have read your online comments about me and my citizen's group. For the sake of argument, let's say you are incorrect. Would you be willing to post on your web site a response from us? Better yet, would you be willing to retract your statements?
To the extent that your statements are based on the misleading statements of others, I can understand why you feel the way you do about us. But we never said word one about Scientific American magazine, and we didn't even say we supported the person who criticized it. We only commented on the library's allowing p0rn on the Internet computers. Sadly, children are actually being raped, molested, or assaulted in libraries that would have been filtered if they were not directed by the ALA not to filter. At least that is our opinion, and it is a plausible one, one that will need to be proven in court. FYI, SciAm is not p0rnographic and is one of the very best magazines in the USA.
Surprisingly, we are not against p0rn, we are not in favor of censorship, and our group supports no particular religion and bases its action on common sense, not religion. It is common sense, for example, that children should not be raped in public libraries because libraries refuse to follow the law to filter their computers.
Our main goal is that the ALA should comply with the law, the very law that it lost in court almost 2 years ago. We don't want the ALA to do want we want because we think we are superior or more moral, our own values are really of no consequence except to ourselves. But we do think the ALA should comply with the law, and we further think that if it did, less children would be physically harmed in public libraries.
Set aside what you have heard from others about us for a moment. Set aside P2S altogether. Would you admit that seeking the ALA's compliance with CIPA and US v. ALA is quite reasonable, especially if it might be true that children continue to be harmed by defiance of the law?
Please consider what I have said carefully. Your words have caused others to blindly accept things that are not only misleading, but are total untruths. Even the Scientific American editor has commented that he agrees with you, and my group is therefore being unfairly tarnished, to say the least.
We understand the world of the Internet can be, well, impersonal. We understand how you could have come to believe the erroneous things you do about our group. We ask that you reconsider your words, perhaps even removing them from your site. Perhaps you can also consider advising people that you may have acted hastily with regard to us. We actually hold no ill will toward you given the likely circumstances. Everyone will understand if you admit an honest mistake was made based on misinformation given to you in the first place. It might even benefit you to remove your remarks because some of them can be construed to be racist and discriminatory against Muslims.
Who knows, perhaps you might even welcome honest debate on the issues that is not based on censorship, morality, or religion.
Thank you very much.
Dan Kleinman
-----
This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it
http://www.plan2succeed.org/ |
|
|
My Response
April 10, 2005
Dear Mr. Kleinman,
If it's true that you did not, in fact, support the destruction of Scientific American's February 2005 issue in Knoxville, Iowa, I retract my statement and apologize for the inaccuracy. But can you deny you fuel the flames of ignorance?
You challenged me in your letter to be open to a broader understanding. I ask the same of you. By targeting groups like the American Library Association -- professionals dedicated to defending the rights of all Americans to read, regardless of their belief systems -- you trivialize the very real dangers children face on a daily basis. In calling children's picture books like MANGABOOM "pornography" you diminish real victimization of children.
Why target public libraries when there are real people in your own town, in your own neighborhood, in your own backyard guilty of palpable abuse? According to the United States Department of Health and Human Services, 1 in every 3 girls will be sexually molested by the time they reaches the age of 12 -- approximately 1 in 6 boys will suffer the same fate.
Wouldn't American children be better served by watchful adults in their own neighborhoods than they are by witch hunts taking aim at the wrong targets? I do apologize if I got it wrong. But you got it wrong too. Can I look forward to seeing your approach amended?
Best wishes,
Kelly Milner Halls |
|
|
|
|
Terry Davis, me and Chris Crutcher.
Available NOW
Spring 2007
Now Available!
Spring 2005
Darby Creek Publishing
August 2003
Boyds Mills Press, 2001
Boyds Mills Press 2001
PIL 2001
My first book, Wiley 1995.
Dinosaur Mummies (2003)
|
