I Emailed this letter to the editor today. We shall see is they print it. Comments anyone?
I continue to hear and read a great deal about the public library not living up to community standards. My question is what are they? No one has addressed this. WBCFSL say they have their own opinion of those community standards. West Bend Parents For Free Speech, also have their idea of community standards. Then there are those that fall somewhere in the middle. So my question is who is going to determine what those standards are that are to reflect the ideology of the ENTRE city? A Christian and an Atheist? A Heterosexual and a homosexual? The city council and the library board? The CCLU and the ACLU? Who? Who is going to fund the research? It really should be up to each individual household to decide what their standards are for their family. Not one group deciding for everyone.
I want to add one final thought. Mrs. Maziarka is not a resident of the city of West Bend. She lives in the township. So while our city tax dollars go to fund this fiasco and we have our pockets tapped, she will not have to pay a dime or shoulder any of the responsibility for it fiscally. When she focused on the harassment policy with the schools last year it was the district’s budget that got tapped because they had to hire an attorney to represent them. It’s our kids that have that much less in the budget for them. She has made comments on her blog the school district is next line for an assault on their libraries. Again it is the children that will pay. When do we all as CITY residents finally scream STOP?
Let me start. STOP!!
Kristina
Showing posts with label Library. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Library. Show all posts
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
WARNING RANT AHEAD
I WANT TO START BY ISSUING THIS WARNING THAT THIS MAY BE OFFENSIVE TO SOME PEOPLE!!
If you find it so please stop reading and exit this blog.
So I am going to comment of the story in the daily news yesterday and today regarding 'Book burners' plan prayer vigil.
This article made me think of the short story by Shirley Jackson - The Lottery. For the complete short story: The Lottery--Shirley Jackson For a brief summery The Lottery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. To ensure a good harvest every year someone in the small town is stoned to death as a sort of sacrifice. Very odd story but a good one and an American Classic. There was also a movie made of it.
When it was first published people were screaming that it should be banned and was an atrocity to the literary world. Shirley Jackson was condemned and ridiculed for it. Frankly I think it is a great story and if you look at it from a different perspective you can draw different hypotheses.
So now we have a book burning debate in good Ol' West Bend. Could it get any better? Yet the WISSUP blogger, Ginny Maziarka, claims that neither she nor her group are affiliated with the CCLU. Christian Civil Liberties Union. Well even if that is indeed a fact their timing could not be worse for her and her faction. She claims she has never asked for the books she is contesting to be removed, which she has. She claims it has never been a homosexual issue, which it has. I don't care that she changed the verbiage of her complaint, it is her use of the word never and the like.
HERE COMES THE POTENTIALLY OFFENSIVE STUFF
Here comes the CCLU. When I read that article in the paper today I literally thought oh good grief here we go... I wondered when I stepped into a time capsule and catapulted back to 1933.
May 10, 1933 - Nazis Burn Books in Germany. So does that mean that if you are blond / brown / red hair with blue / green eyes and Caucasian we should gather in the town square and stone those who look different or have a different faith belief or different moral standing or just basically do not look like the All - American specimen? Wow now that would make headlines. Stoning in West Bend WI due to a small faction trying to infringe on others rights and shove their "moral" beliefs down the rest of the towns throat! I'll go to the quarry and start gathering the stones. Do I have any volunteers for the first person to go? Suggestions? Taking names and making lists... Don't be shy. After all that is basically what the CCLU is asking for. Maybe a noose would be more fitting for them. Or even a crucifix? A modern day crucifixion. Quick call Charlie Gibson I'll get the popcorn and lawn chairs.
The CCLU says that they are praying the mayor will read the Bible which states "thou shalt not kill" and "thou shall not condemn thy neighbor." Oh I love it. Stupidity at it's finest. I can cherry pick Scripture as well. Judge not lest you be judged. Or another frequently quoted one "He who casts the first stone..." What about all the other buzz words, forgive, love, patience and all the other fruits of the Spirit? Being Christians at least I assume being the CCLU or Ginny's group you should know these things, Yes? Are you not to live and walk according to the Word? Where is that? Not in the library issue. Just about as ridiculous as a bunch of elderly people perusing the young adult section and finding books in the stacks that just so happened to have slang language regarding sex, homosexuality and race. That it is so offensive to people in different counties that the mere presence on the shelves has scared them and caused mental and emotional anguish and effects their well being. REALLY? WOW, Gotta love that one too. What is even more distressing is that 4 elderly men are perusing in the youth zone to begin with. When I was a kid they were called 'dirty old men'. What the hell are they doing there? Shouldn't they be reading techniques for better using a computer, or the Internet. Educating themselves with modern technology? or reminiscing about World War 2 or the Korean war? Or going down the list of all their medical ails. Or maybe re-taking the road test for the DMV.
In MY opinion this group, CCLU, like our own local group are professional complainers. They are pushers. Not drug pushers but morality pushers that operate under the guise of protesting kids. They use that argument to garner as much public support as possible, get a community all riled up and then let it take it's course.
The most amazing thing about all this is even as all this crap is costing West Bend money that will have to be reflected in our taxes, Ginny and 3 of the members of the CCLU can walk away scott free not having their taxes effected a penny for all the grief they have caused simply because they do not live in city limits. So they will continue to rack up the tax bills of those of us that do and screw us at both ends. Thanks a lot. Boy both groups have so much to be proud of don't they? It's nothing more than a fascist regime trying extrapolate something out of nothing. In MY opinion anyway.
Now the CCLU is claiming they are going to file in federal court? Can I just say Crap again? What do you think the outcome of that will be? CCLU Vs. City of West Bend mayor and library board. All because they want the right to publicly burn the book 'Baby Bebop' by Francesca Lia Block. I say go ahead. Burn baby burn, but when you do be prepared to pay baby pay. the most ironic thing about all this is that book has been out of print for a number of years and now all of a sudden because of our little city and it's now national debate there have been inquiries into putting it back in print. Book stores can't get them or can't find a copy. Libraries across the nation have waiting lists of people who want to read it. The author has gained even more notoriety. So really all the CCLU has done is shed light on a book that most did not know about and put it on the national stage where tons of people want to read it. I am sure the author says thank you.
IMHO the CCLU is simply trying to ride on the coat tails of WBCFSL and their regime. They lie in wait to pounce on the next band wagon to pass by and begin their rants all over again. WBCFSL opened the door for these goofs to walk through and then they make the statement that they are not affiliated with them nor do they agree with them? Interesting since they followed WBCFSL through the door. The CCLU just waits for something like this to come up somewhere and than BAM there they are. So concerned about our community. They may be taking a different approach then WBCFSL is but both are costing money and bring negative attention to a city the DO NOT EVEN LIVE IN!
As John Stossel (sp) would say at the end of his segments on 20 /20 Give me a break!
Back off and go after you own libraries of which Milwaukee and Milwaukee County has many. As for WBCFSL, you back off too. You, WBCFSL are protecting no one. You, WBCFSL are causing untold money to be spent of which you will not be responsible for in any means. WBCFSL say they are proud to live in this community well technically the don't and second if that were true they would not be doing the press junkets, making phone calls and sending Fax's to every media outlet available with their rants and personal opinions. All while giving the appearance of mild, meek, humble, pious good Christians. Yet when someone reads WBCFSL, WISSUP blog or responses to others the wording can be vicious and vindictive. Yet they will not answer questions that are posed to them when all the evidence is stacked against them.
OK that is my rant for the day. I am so mad about all this that I can't even think straight. I so want to just slam people bringing this issue up and keeping it on the fore front, but I will not say or rather write everything I am thinking that would not be good to just slam it all down on the table. It is real hard to remain respectful when I am this angry. So with that I will close.
"Books are the treasured wealth of the world," --- Henry David Thoreau
If you find it so please stop reading and exit this blog.
So I am going to comment of the story in the daily news yesterday and today regarding 'Book burners' plan prayer vigil.
This article made me think of the short story by Shirley Jackson - The Lottery. For the complete short story: The Lottery--Shirley Jackson For a brief summery The Lottery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. To ensure a good harvest every year someone in the small town is stoned to death as a sort of sacrifice. Very odd story but a good one and an American Classic. There was also a movie made of it.
When it was first published people were screaming that it should be banned and was an atrocity to the literary world. Shirley Jackson was condemned and ridiculed for it. Frankly I think it is a great story and if you look at it from a different perspective you can draw different hypotheses.
So now we have a book burning debate in good Ol' West Bend. Could it get any better? Yet the WISSUP blogger, Ginny Maziarka, claims that neither she nor her group are affiliated with the CCLU. Christian Civil Liberties Union. Well even if that is indeed a fact their timing could not be worse for her and her faction. She claims she has never asked for the books she is contesting to be removed, which she has. She claims it has never been a homosexual issue, which it has. I don't care that she changed the verbiage of her complaint, it is her use of the word never and the like.
HERE COMES THE POTENTIALLY OFFENSIVE STUFF
Here comes the CCLU. When I read that article in the paper today I literally thought oh good grief here we go... I wondered when I stepped into a time capsule and catapulted back to 1933.
May 10, 1933 - Nazis Burn Books in Germany. So does that mean that if you are blond / brown / red hair with blue / green eyes and Caucasian we should gather in the town square and stone those who look different or have a different faith belief or different moral standing or just basically do not look like the All - American specimen? Wow now that would make headlines. Stoning in West Bend WI due to a small faction trying to infringe on others rights and shove their "moral" beliefs down the rest of the towns throat! I'll go to the quarry and start gathering the stones. Do I have any volunteers for the first person to go? Suggestions? Taking names and making lists... Don't be shy. After all that is basically what the CCLU is asking for. Maybe a noose would be more fitting for them. Or even a crucifix? A modern day crucifixion. Quick call Charlie Gibson I'll get the popcorn and lawn chairs.
The CCLU says that they are praying the mayor will read the Bible which states "thou shalt not kill" and "thou shall not condemn thy neighbor." Oh I love it. Stupidity at it's finest. I can cherry pick Scripture as well. Judge not lest you be judged. Or another frequently quoted one "He who casts the first stone..." What about all the other buzz words, forgive, love, patience and all the other fruits of the Spirit? Being Christians at least I assume being the CCLU or Ginny's group you should know these things, Yes? Are you not to live and walk according to the Word? Where is that? Not in the library issue. Just about as ridiculous as a bunch of elderly people perusing the young adult section and finding books in the stacks that just so happened to have slang language regarding sex, homosexuality and race. That it is so offensive to people in different counties that the mere presence on the shelves has scared them and caused mental and emotional anguish and effects their well being. REALLY? WOW, Gotta love that one too. What is even more distressing is that 4 elderly men are perusing in the youth zone to begin with. When I was a kid they were called 'dirty old men'. What the hell are they doing there? Shouldn't they be reading techniques for better using a computer, or the Internet. Educating themselves with modern technology? or reminiscing about World War 2 or the Korean war? Or going down the list of all their medical ails. Or maybe re-taking the road test for the DMV.
In MY opinion this group, CCLU, like our own local group are professional complainers. They are pushers. Not drug pushers but morality pushers that operate under the guise of protesting kids. They use that argument to garner as much public support as possible, get a community all riled up and then let it take it's course.
The most amazing thing about all this is even as all this crap is costing West Bend money that will have to be reflected in our taxes, Ginny and 3 of the members of the CCLU can walk away scott free not having their taxes effected a penny for all the grief they have caused simply because they do not live in city limits. So they will continue to rack up the tax bills of those of us that do and screw us at both ends. Thanks a lot. Boy both groups have so much to be proud of don't they? It's nothing more than a fascist regime trying extrapolate something out of nothing. In MY opinion anyway.
Now the CCLU is claiming they are going to file in federal court? Can I just say Crap again? What do you think the outcome of that will be? CCLU Vs. City of West Bend mayor and library board. All because they want the right to publicly burn the book 'Baby Bebop' by Francesca Lia Block. I say go ahead. Burn baby burn, but when you do be prepared to pay baby pay. the most ironic thing about all this is that book has been out of print for a number of years and now all of a sudden because of our little city and it's now national debate there have been inquiries into putting it back in print. Book stores can't get them or can't find a copy. Libraries across the nation have waiting lists of people who want to read it. The author has gained even more notoriety. So really all the CCLU has done is shed light on a book that most did not know about and put it on the national stage where tons of people want to read it. I am sure the author says thank you.
IMHO the CCLU is simply trying to ride on the coat tails of WBCFSL and their regime. They lie in wait to pounce on the next band wagon to pass by and begin their rants all over again. WBCFSL opened the door for these goofs to walk through and then they make the statement that they are not affiliated with them nor do they agree with them? Interesting since they followed WBCFSL through the door. The CCLU just waits for something like this to come up somewhere and than BAM there they are. So concerned about our community. They may be taking a different approach then WBCFSL is but both are costing money and bring negative attention to a city the DO NOT EVEN LIVE IN!
As John Stossel (sp) would say at the end of his segments on 20 /20 Give me a break!
Back off and go after you own libraries of which Milwaukee and Milwaukee County has many. As for WBCFSL, you back off too. You, WBCFSL are protecting no one. You, WBCFSL are causing untold money to be spent of which you will not be responsible for in any means. WBCFSL say they are proud to live in this community well technically the don't and second if that were true they would not be doing the press junkets, making phone calls and sending Fax's to every media outlet available with their rants and personal opinions. All while giving the appearance of mild, meek, humble, pious good Christians. Yet when someone reads WBCFSL, WISSUP blog or responses to others the wording can be vicious and vindictive. Yet they will not answer questions that are posed to them when all the evidence is stacked against them.
OK that is my rant for the day. I am so mad about all this that I can't even think straight. I so want to just slam people bringing this issue up and keeping it on the fore front, but I will not say or rather write everything I am thinking that would not be good to just slam it all down on the table. It is real hard to remain respectful when I am this angry. So with that I will close.
"Books are the treasured wealth of the world," --- Henry David Thoreau
Saturday, June 20, 2009
OOOHHH Interesting stuff about Library issue.
Hey folks I got some good stuff for ya here.
So I have been up most of the night because I couldn't sleep. So I decided that I would clear out my DVR of stuff that has just been on there too long and I had forgotten about it.
So I have some quotes from Ginny Maziarka she made to different TV outlets. Most of which were made at the beginning of her complaint
I am going to quote her EXACTLY as she said them. Thus providing with protection of it being said I am taking them out of context. Her quotes will be in RED my commentary in regular font. Here we go... Fasten your seat belt, make sure your arms and legs stay in the train at all times,(roller coaster speak for those with queasy stomachs that don't know what that means.) thank you and have a nice ride because here we go. See you back at the station after the ride...
**PLEASE NOTE: Not everything the reporter or Ginny said will quoted as the interviews are each several minutes long. You may be able to go to that particular TV stations web site and see if the have an achieve of it.**
Tuesday March 3rd. Channel 6 WITI 5:00 PM"
"All the books every book that was in the young adult zone was a pro homosexual theme with nothing being offered on the opposite spectrum. So that concerned me. REPORTER: She wants two particular books pulled from the shelves. Ginny: One is the Perks Of Being A Wallflower, the other is called the Geography Club. REPORTER: She also wants the web site link to be taken down and the relocation of books that are inadequate for teenagers."
MY Commentary: All the books in the YA Zone are pro homosexual? ALL? Wow didn't know that. Ginny also must have forgotten that there are books "on the opposite spectrum" on the library web site.
Now she said on this date that she "wants two particular books pulled from the shelves and wants the website link to be taken down." And this has never been a homosexual issue? Never asked for the books to be removed? Why does the phrase "pulled from the shelves" not say the same thing?
I'm going to make note as I comment on each broadcast at what point SHE HERSELF changes her request or contradicts herself.
So here we have 3 requests:
1) two books pulled from the shelf
2) removal of library web site link
3) relocation of other books
Tuesday March 3rd. Today's TMJ4 News 10:00 PM
"These books, all of them, are pro homosexual books. There aren't any books available for kids who are maybe looking to steer away from the lifestyle, or are questioning how to get out of the lifestyle. REPORTER: Maziarka says balance is needed."
Again with the All book thing and no books on steering away from gay lifestyle. Which I already pointed out already exists.
Lets do the tally:
1) Two books removed X's 1
2) removal of link
3) balance X's 2
Tuesday March 3rd. CBS 58 News 10:00 PM.
REPORTER (not quoting here. She was just talking about the issue and complaint filed and than it cuts to) Ginny "pornographic language in them and uh The Perks Of Being A Wall Flower is one were contesting and The Geography Club is another books. Two books that we would like to see actually removed from our library for our youth. REPORTER: talks more about complaint cut to Ginny "it gives the appearance that our library actually indeed is censoring the books considering the fact that the only material for our young adult about homosexuality are books that are pro homosexual."
OK again saying you want to remove 2 books from the library. The library appearing to be doing the censoring? That's laughable. She only said it "appeared to censoring" Where as it is her actually TRYING to force the library to censor books. Gotta love it.
Tally time:
1) Two books removed X's 2
2) web site link removed
3) balance X's 2
4) relocation of other books
So we have 2 checks for removal, 1 for web site link removal and 2 for balance. Consistency at this point and 1 for relocation.
Tuesday March 3rd Channel 12 news 10:00 PM
REPORTER: Gives background about library board meeting being canceled due to over crowding and the complaint than cut to: "Were not asking for a ban on any books, getting rid of those books, were just asking for a balance of books." REPORTER: "Now Ginny say she is asking for two of the books to be pulled from the collection she thinks they are just too graphic."
Please refer to my first response. Tally:
1) removal of 2 books X's 3
2) for web link removed X;s 1
3) balance X 3
4) reclassification
Thursday March 26th Channel 12 news 10:00 PM
This broadcast does not have Ginny speaking. Reporter Mike Miller was doing a story on the meeting that Ginny held at Silverbrook. He says "The idea is not to ban books here at the West Bend Public Library but to move some, reclassify some and provide what the organizers call more balance."
Tally:
1) remove books X's 3
2)web link removed X'1
3) balance X's 4
4) reclassification
can you see it morphing now?
Thursday March 26th CBS 58 News 10:00 PM
This broadcast too does not have Ginny speaking but a reporter summing up the meeting at Silverbrook and saying "hoping to gain the support (of the people who attended that meeting) to have some of these books reclassified at the West Bend Public Library. Books the couple say are not age appropriate for the youth section like King and King and Rainbow High which deal with homosexuality."
Again see my comments able.
Tally:
1) removal of books X's 4
2) web site removed X's 1
3) balance X's 5
4) reclassification
Friday May 28th Fox 6 News 9:00 PM
This broadcast was regarding the read in at the library that Jake Jurrus (sp) started and West Bend Parents For Free Speech helped promote. At the end of the cast the reporter says: "and today we spoke with the groups organizer (meaning Ginny) who wants to change the library policy. She says that the library withdrew their first complaint so they filed again in April they still have yet to meet with the librarian or the library board which is normal protocol anytime that a complaint is filed."
And than there it was. On May 28th was when she states be new stance. She now wants to change the library policy. Maybe if Ginny reviewed her video tape she would see how many times she changed what she was asking for and why she was told to refile. All of her public states to the media.
OK final tally,
1) remove books X's 4
2) web site kink removed X's 2
3) balance X's 5
4) reclassification X's 5
5) change library policies. X's 2
All that in just a few interviews. WOW!
So I have been up most of the night because I couldn't sleep. So I decided that I would clear out my DVR of stuff that has just been on there too long and I had forgotten about it.
So I have some quotes from Ginny Maziarka she made to different TV outlets. Most of which were made at the beginning of her complaint
I am going to quote her EXACTLY as she said them. Thus providing with protection of it being said I am taking them out of context. Her quotes will be in RED my commentary in regular font. Here we go... Fasten your seat belt, make sure your arms and legs stay in the train at all times,(roller coaster speak for those with queasy stomachs that don't know what that means.) thank you and have a nice ride because here we go. See you back at the station after the ride...
**PLEASE NOTE: Not everything the reporter or Ginny said will quoted as the interviews are each several minutes long. You may be able to go to that particular TV stations web site and see if the have an achieve of it.**
Tuesday March 3rd. Channel 6 WITI 5:00 PM"
"All the books every book that was in the young adult zone was a pro homosexual theme with nothing being offered on the opposite spectrum. So that concerned me. REPORTER: She wants two particular books pulled from the shelves. Ginny: One is the Perks Of Being A Wallflower, the other is called the Geography Club. REPORTER: She also wants the web site link to be taken down and the relocation of books that are inadequate for teenagers."
MY Commentary: All the books in the YA Zone are pro homosexual? ALL? Wow didn't know that. Ginny also must have forgotten that there are books "on the opposite spectrum" on the library web site.
Now she said on this date that she "wants two particular books pulled from the shelves and wants the website link to be taken down." And this has never been a homosexual issue? Never asked for the books to be removed? Why does the phrase "pulled from the shelves" not say the same thing?
I'm going to make note as I comment on each broadcast at what point SHE HERSELF changes her request or contradicts herself.
So here we have 3 requests:
1) two books pulled from the shelf
2) removal of library web site link
3) relocation of other books
Tuesday March 3rd. Today's TMJ4 News 10:00 PM
"These books, all of them, are pro homosexual books. There aren't any books available for kids who are maybe looking to steer away from the lifestyle, or are questioning how to get out of the lifestyle. REPORTER: Maziarka says balance is needed."
Again with the All book thing and no books on steering away from gay lifestyle. Which I already pointed out already exists.
Lets do the tally:
1) Two books removed X's 1
2) removal of link
3) balance X's 2
Tuesday March 3rd. CBS 58 News 10:00 PM.
REPORTER (not quoting here. She was just talking about the issue and complaint filed and than it cuts to) Ginny "pornographic language in them and uh The Perks Of Being A Wall Flower is one were contesting and The Geography Club is another books. Two books that we would like to see actually removed from our library for our youth. REPORTER: talks more about complaint cut to Ginny "it gives the appearance that our library actually indeed is censoring the books considering the fact that the only material for our young adult about homosexuality are books that are pro homosexual."
OK again saying you want to remove 2 books from the library. The library appearing to be doing the censoring? That's laughable. She only said it "appeared to censoring" Where as it is her actually TRYING to force the library to censor books. Gotta love it.
Tally time:
1) Two books removed X's 2
2) web site link removed
3) balance X's 2
4) relocation of other books
So we have 2 checks for removal, 1 for web site link removal and 2 for balance. Consistency at this point and 1 for relocation.
Tuesday March 3rd Channel 12 news 10:00 PM
REPORTER: Gives background about library board meeting being canceled due to over crowding and the complaint than cut to: "Were not asking for a ban on any books, getting rid of those books, were just asking for a balance of books." REPORTER: "Now Ginny say she is asking for two of the books to be pulled from the collection she thinks they are just too graphic."
Please refer to my first response. Tally:
1) removal of 2 books X's 3
2) for web link removed X;s 1
3) balance X 3
4) reclassification
Thursday March 26th Channel 12 news 10:00 PM
This broadcast does not have Ginny speaking. Reporter Mike Miller was doing a story on the meeting that Ginny held at Silverbrook. He says "The idea is not to ban books here at the West Bend Public Library but to move some, reclassify some and provide what the organizers call more balance."
Tally:
1) remove books X's 3
2)web link removed X'1
3) balance X's 4
4) reclassification
can you see it morphing now?
Thursday March 26th CBS 58 News 10:00 PM
This broadcast too does not have Ginny speaking but a reporter summing up the meeting at Silverbrook and saying "hoping to gain the support (of the people who attended that meeting) to have some of these books reclassified at the West Bend Public Library. Books the couple say are not age appropriate for the youth section like King and King and Rainbow High which deal with homosexuality."
Again see my comments able.
Tally:
1) removal of books X's 4
2) web site removed X's 1
3) balance X's 5
4) reclassification
Friday May 28th Fox 6 News 9:00 PM
This broadcast was regarding the read in at the library that Jake Jurrus (sp) started and West Bend Parents For Free Speech helped promote. At the end of the cast the reporter says: "and today we spoke with the groups organizer (meaning Ginny) who wants to change the library policy. She says that the library withdrew their first complaint so they filed again in April they still have yet to meet with the librarian or the library board which is normal protocol anytime that a complaint is filed."
And than there it was. On May 28th was when she states be new stance. She now wants to change the library policy. Maybe if Ginny reviewed her video tape she would see how many times she changed what she was asking for and why she was told to refile. All of her public states to the media.
OK final tally,
1) remove books X's 4
2) web site kink removed X's 2
3) balance X's 5
4) reclassification X's 5
5) change library policies. X's 2
All that in just a few interviews. WOW!
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Outcome
OK folks, the ethics committee met this afternoon at 2:30. It was held in a public forum in the common counsel chambers. There were 3 of the 5 members of the committee there. It was said that even without the whole committee being there for this stage of the complaint 3 was enough to make a decision if it should move forward or not.
They went through the complaint point by point. It was done in a very polite and respectful manner and I appreciated that. They diligently discussed every point.
The end result was they did not find any ethical violations. I was asked after the meeting how I felt about it. I simply said I am not thrilled by it but I respect the decision, and their deliberation there of. I also stated that I am appreciative that I was able to exercise my first amendment right of freedom of speech, and my 14 amendment of due process.
So while I do not agree with the "verdict per se" I am OK with it. I repeated to the two that were asking me questions after the meeting that my choice to file the ethics complaint was in no way a vendetta or vengeance against alderman Vrana regarding his vote at the counsel meeting. It was simply about some of the comments that were made in a public forum. I understand that there are guidelines for these things and according to the ethics committee he did not violate them. I may not agree, just as others do not agree with the decision the library board made, I can and will accept it and move forward. I went up an shook everyones hand and told them thank you for their time and careful thought that went into their decision.
I am grateful for the opportunity to at least voice my opinion and respect the decision even if I do not necessarily agree.
We shall see what take the papers prints. I am sure I will have questions from people and am now free to discuss it. I would not do so while it was still pending because I have seen what can happen when things continue to be talked about either on blogs or media and how things can be spun to suit what each person individually believe about what ever the issue is.
So if there are question regarding the ethics complaint I will address what I can. However, please remember that the library issue and the ethics complaint are two very separate issues. Like I have said before I can differentiate between the two.
Sure I have opinions about both, but while the comments were made at a counsel meeting about the library issue it was not his vote that prompted me to file. It was the comment that was made immediately after with about 10 or so citizens gathered around him. Which was my last point on the complaint. That was the main point that the paper missed when they wrote about it being filed.
If you would like to see the complaint in it's entirety it is posted here further down on my blog. It is even titled My ENTIRE ethics complaint.
What a great country we live in hey? I mean we have people that are unhappy with the library and spoke out, and someone unhappy with a local official and spoke out. Democracy you've got to love it.
They went through the complaint point by point. It was done in a very polite and respectful manner and I appreciated that. They diligently discussed every point.
The end result was they did not find any ethical violations. I was asked after the meeting how I felt about it. I simply said I am not thrilled by it but I respect the decision, and their deliberation there of. I also stated that I am appreciative that I was able to exercise my first amendment right of freedom of speech, and my 14 amendment of due process.
So while I do not agree with the "verdict per se" I am OK with it. I repeated to the two that were asking me questions after the meeting that my choice to file the ethics complaint was in no way a vendetta or vengeance against alderman Vrana regarding his vote at the counsel meeting. It was simply about some of the comments that were made in a public forum. I understand that there are guidelines for these things and according to the ethics committee he did not violate them. I may not agree, just as others do not agree with the decision the library board made, I can and will accept it and move forward. I went up an shook everyones hand and told them thank you for their time and careful thought that went into their decision.
I am grateful for the opportunity to at least voice my opinion and respect the decision even if I do not necessarily agree.
We shall see what take the papers prints. I am sure I will have questions from people and am now free to discuss it. I would not do so while it was still pending because I have seen what can happen when things continue to be talked about either on blogs or media and how things can be spun to suit what each person individually believe about what ever the issue is.
So if there are question regarding the ethics complaint I will address what I can. However, please remember that the library issue and the ethics complaint are two very separate issues. Like I have said before I can differentiate between the two.
Sure I have opinions about both, but while the comments were made at a counsel meeting about the library issue it was not his vote that prompted me to file. It was the comment that was made immediately after with about 10 or so citizens gathered around him. Which was my last point on the complaint. That was the main point that the paper missed when they wrote about it being filed.
If you would like to see the complaint in it's entirety it is posted here further down on my blog. It is even titled My ENTIRE ethics complaint.
What a great country we live in hey? I mean we have people that are unhappy with the library and spoke out, and someone unhappy with a local official and spoke out. Democracy you've got to love it.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Library, Humanity, Freedom, Democracy, Peace
Can I just say something here. I was watching a show on National Geographic tonight Locked Up Abroad. Basically people get in trouble in some other country for what ever stupid thing they may have done there. To see the prison systems there oh my.
It got me to thinking what our founding fathers must be thinking about our little tiny town that was not even on the map when they put pen to parchment all those years ago. I think they must be smiling down on us with pride. Not because the issue is the library or books, homosexuality or even constitutional amendments. They must be proud because we can have heated debated in public places, speak our minds freely, disagree with each other, our government and even challenge our government. That my friends is FREEDOM! It is the freedom that our founders hoped for the generations that would follow them in the dreams they had. I can hear them sigh Ah democracy we did our job all those years ago.
We could be in China. Remember this? BEIJING (Reuters) – China smothered Tienanmen Square with police on Thursday to prevent commemoration of the crackdown on pro-democracy protesters 20 years ago and the United States demanded Beijing account for those killed.
Tanks rolled into the square before dawn on June 4, 1989, to crush weeks of student and worker protests. The ruling Communist Party has never released a death toll and fears any public marking of the crackdown could undermine its hold on power. That's just a glimpse of the article here the link to the whole thing:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090604/ts_nm/us_china_tiananmen_17
We could be living there or under that kind of government where the mere mention of something that happened, or speaking the words freedom or democracy could still get you arrested, put in a labor camp for who knows how many years or even killed. We should be proud even though we disagree with so much passion, we have the FREEDOM to do it.
If I remember history correctly even our founders squabbled, fought, yelled, and everything else while they were trying to agree what should and should not be in the many of our countries most important documents. So I say thank you God I was born into a country with FREEDOM to disagree in public, fight for what we believe, protest against what we don't and in the end hold onto to our most basic similarities. HUMANITY and FREEDOM.
The prime example of our humanity at it's best was when tragedy struck the other view point from ours regarding West Bend Memorial Community Library, and hands were reached across the divide to offer some sort of solace to an occurrence that really has no words for. That my friends is because we have freedom to disagree but the humanity to still reach out to someone who may need it at that time. Temporary truce.
Suggestion: get a hold of someone you have a disagreement with or difference of opinion. invite them for coffee, lunch or even a walk in a beautiful park. Get to know the person and set the issues aside if even for just an hour. Don't talk about the differences. Ask them to tell you about themselves something you don't know about them. It could let to peace. I am not saying agreement on the issue (remember no talking about the issues) but common ground can leads to peace. Even if it is to agree to disagree and respect for their opinion and in any future debates the issue would be discussed not the people behind it.
Did you know that during some of the Civil Wars bloodiest battles the next day when the fighting had ended and the dead lay on the ground all over the place the "clean up crews" for each side came together and helped bury each others dead. They shared food and water, yes they at together.
World War I, the Christmas truce of 1914 between Britain and Germany. One side heard the other singing Oh Christmas tree" from the other side of the trenches each side dug in the same mountain, their opposition joined in. They came out of the trenches and exchanged food and what have you with each other. They played football with each other in what at the time was called no man's land because it was just barren land with some mountains with tunnels and trenches dug in them by both Britain and Germany. Many times just a few weeks away from each other. They celebrated Christmas together. Imagine the site. Two countries embattled in a bloody war. Each side hates the other and wants nothing more than to kill as many of them as they can. There were no orders for a Christmas truce. The commanders of each army did not order them to have a truce it just spontaneously happened.
HUMANITY! That is what I think our founding fathers hoped for us as a nation, a people, and the world. It can be good to disagree once in a while as long as humanity is the outcome.
I have absolutely nothing against he author or the WISSUP blog. NONE! I disagree with some things (mostly the library) that have been said or positions taken on some things but her as a fellow traveler on this wonderful earth nah. Maybe I would really enjoy her. Maybe we would have some things in common that we do agree on. Who knows, if not we will still at least 2 base line principles. FREEDOM and HUMANITY and PEACE.
It got me to thinking what our founding fathers must be thinking about our little tiny town that was not even on the map when they put pen to parchment all those years ago. I think they must be smiling down on us with pride. Not because the issue is the library or books, homosexuality or even constitutional amendments. They must be proud because we can have heated debated in public places, speak our minds freely, disagree with each other, our government and even challenge our government. That my friends is FREEDOM! It is the freedom that our founders hoped for the generations that would follow them in the dreams they had. I can hear them sigh Ah democracy we did our job all those years ago.
We could be in China. Remember this? BEIJING (Reuters) – China smothered Tienanmen Square with police on Thursday to prevent commemoration of the crackdown on pro-democracy protesters 20 years ago and the United States demanded Beijing account for those killed.
Tanks rolled into the square before dawn on June 4, 1989, to crush weeks of student and worker protests. The ruling Communist Party has never released a death toll and fears any public marking of the crackdown could undermine its hold on power. That's just a glimpse of the article here the link to the whole thing:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090604/ts_nm/us_china_tiananmen_17
We could be living there or under that kind of government where the mere mention of something that happened, or speaking the words freedom or democracy could still get you arrested, put in a labor camp for who knows how many years or even killed. We should be proud even though we disagree with so much passion, we have the FREEDOM to do it.
If I remember history correctly even our founders squabbled, fought, yelled, and everything else while they were trying to agree what should and should not be in the many of our countries most important documents. So I say thank you God I was born into a country with FREEDOM to disagree in public, fight for what we believe, protest against what we don't and in the end hold onto to our most basic similarities. HUMANITY and FREEDOM.
The prime example of our humanity at it's best was when tragedy struck the other view point from ours regarding West Bend Memorial Community Library, and hands were reached across the divide to offer some sort of solace to an occurrence that really has no words for. That my friends is because we have freedom to disagree but the humanity to still reach out to someone who may need it at that time. Temporary truce.
Suggestion: get a hold of someone you have a disagreement with or difference of opinion. invite them for coffee, lunch or even a walk in a beautiful park. Get to know the person and set the issues aside if even for just an hour. Don't talk about the differences. Ask them to tell you about themselves something you don't know about them. It could let to peace. I am not saying agreement on the issue (remember no talking about the issues) but common ground can leads to peace. Even if it is to agree to disagree and respect for their opinion and in any future debates the issue would be discussed not the people behind it.
Did you know that during some of the Civil Wars bloodiest battles the next day when the fighting had ended and the dead lay on the ground all over the place the "clean up crews" for each side came together and helped bury each others dead. They shared food and water, yes they at together.
World War I, the Christmas truce of 1914 between Britain and Germany. One side heard the other singing Oh Christmas tree" from the other side of the trenches each side dug in the same mountain, their opposition joined in. They came out of the trenches and exchanged food and what have you with each other. They played football with each other in what at the time was called no man's land because it was just barren land with some mountains with tunnels and trenches dug in them by both Britain and Germany. Many times just a few weeks away from each other. They celebrated Christmas together. Imagine the site. Two countries embattled in a bloody war. Each side hates the other and wants nothing more than to kill as many of them as they can. There were no orders for a Christmas truce. The commanders of each army did not order them to have a truce it just spontaneously happened.
HUMANITY! That is what I think our founding fathers hoped for us as a nation, a people, and the world. It can be good to disagree once in a while as long as humanity is the outcome.
I have absolutely nothing against he author or the WISSUP blog. NONE! I disagree with some things (mostly the library) that have been said or positions taken on some things but her as a fellow traveler on this wonderful earth nah. Maybe I would really enjoy her. Maybe we would have some things in common that we do agree on. Who knows, if not we will still at least 2 base line principles. FREEDOM and HUMANITY and PEACE.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
ENTIRE complaint to ethics committee
My ENTIRE letter to the ethics committee in West Bend regarding comments made by Alderman Vrana at a Common Council meeting. This will also serve as the only reply I will give either in the blog - is - phere or anywhere for now. I REFUSE to try this issue in the media or cyberspace. The West Bend Daily News printed a blip about it on Tuesday June 1 - 09 but DID NOT include the main point and reason for my complaint. Which is his statement about policy.
I will also say that I DID NOT file this because I disagreed with him about his vote to not reappoint the 4 members of the library board. That is a clear and separate issue.
So below is my ENTIRE complaint. Not fragments there of...
Members of the West Bend Ethics Committee, 5/28/09
I am writing this letter in reference to the West Bend Municipal code General Government (Code of Ethics) 1.66, also Wisconsin state statute 19.59 under the Code of Ethics.
Pursuant to the City of West Bend, WI municipal code of Ethics 1.65 – 1.67 paying special attention to statute 1.66, it is my belief that Alderman Vrana is in violation of this ordinance.
1.66 RESPONSIBILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICE:
Public officials and employees are agents of public purpose and hold office for the benefits of the public. They are bound to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this State and carry out impartially the laws of the nation, State and the City and to observe in their official acts the highest standards of morality and to discharge faithfully the duties of their office regardless of personal considerations, recognizing that the public interest must be in their prime concern. Their conduct in both their official and private affairs should be above reproach so as to foster respect for all government.
Alderman Vrana made public statements at the council meeting on April 21st of which I provided a DVD copy from the West Bend TV Studio located in City Hall. There have been numerous newspaper articles quoting him that can be provided at your request.
His statements include but are not limited to:
· Comparing the West Bend public library to a “porn shop” due to a small selection of books in the young adult section with homosexual themes. This statement was followed by a reference to the city ordinance banning selling of pornographic material within 1000 feet of a school. “I believe the library is within 1000 feet of a school.” These same books have been approved for the age group by the American Library Association (ALA) as having literary merit.
· When asked at the April 21st CC meeting while answering a question posed to him by the mayor if he would only approve of someone who holds his same philosophy, his reply was “that is my right.” Referencing the First amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Thus he verbally confirmed his vote would be in opposition of 1.66 RESPONSIBILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICE and discharging faithfully the duties of their offices regardless of personal considerations, recognizing that the public interest must be in their prime concern.
· Also at the CC meeting on April 21st. he stated “I’m concerned about the morality of this city.” This statement seems to suggest his personal opinion about the homosexual themed books in the public library is immoral. Here again, it is his personal opinion and not necessarily that of the majority in the city or even his own jurisdiction, but leaning more towards those who filed the complaint against the library. Again another violation of injecting personal opinion.
· At a later date he was quoted in the Daily News regarding the policy and procedures the library board must follow for all complaints. Alderman Vrana stated “I don’t care what policy is I want those books out of there.” Again a clear violation of the same section noted above.
If a city alderman is entrusted as a representative of West Bend and elected to uphold all of the cities policies and procedures but does not have respect for other agencies policies and procedures how can that person be trusted to uphold the policies he is to safeguard. That he will not invoke the same personal philosophy of not caring what the policies are and pursue his own agenda of what he feels is correct; regardless of what the majority may deem appropriate or having the public interest as his prime concern.
The above are a small list of statements that he has made publicly regarding this issue. According to 1.66 RESPONSIBILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICE their conduct in both their official and private affairs should be above reproach so as to foster respect for all government. Alderman Vrana’s conduct has not followed that code as it is written.
I believe Mr. Vrana’s actions demonstrate that in his official duties in this specific issue regarding the West Bend Library controversy, that 1) he did not act in an independent, impartial manner that was responsible to the people, 2) his conduct did not re-enforce the public's confidence in the integrity of the city government, 3) he used his aldermanic position to purport his personal philosophy not that of the city as a whole.
Therefore, I am requesting that a formal investigation be made by the ethics committee regarding this matter and appropriate measures be taken to rectify this.
Respectfully,
Kristina
( I left out my last name, address and phone number on this blog because it is not needed for this post. It was included in the complaint filed and it was notarized by a legal notary.)
I will also say that I DID NOT file this because I disagreed with him about his vote to not reappoint the 4 members of the library board. That is a clear and separate issue.
So below is my ENTIRE complaint. Not fragments there of...
Members of the West Bend Ethics Committee, 5/28/09
I am writing this letter in reference to the West Bend Municipal code General Government (Code of Ethics) 1.66, also Wisconsin state statute 19.59 under the Code of Ethics.
Pursuant to the City of West Bend, WI municipal code of Ethics 1.65 – 1.67 paying special attention to statute 1.66, it is my belief that Alderman Vrana is in violation of this ordinance.
1.66 RESPONSIBILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICE:
Public officials and employees are agents of public purpose and hold office for the benefits of the public. They are bound to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this State and carry out impartially the laws of the nation, State and the City and to observe in their official acts the highest standards of morality and to discharge faithfully the duties of their office regardless of personal considerations, recognizing that the public interest must be in their prime concern. Their conduct in both their official and private affairs should be above reproach so as to foster respect for all government.
Alderman Vrana made public statements at the council meeting on April 21st of which I provided a DVD copy from the West Bend TV Studio located in City Hall. There have been numerous newspaper articles quoting him that can be provided at your request.
His statements include but are not limited to:
· Comparing the West Bend public library to a “porn shop” due to a small selection of books in the young adult section with homosexual themes. This statement was followed by a reference to the city ordinance banning selling of pornographic material within 1000 feet of a school. “I believe the library is within 1000 feet of a school.” These same books have been approved for the age group by the American Library Association (ALA) as having literary merit.
· When asked at the April 21st CC meeting while answering a question posed to him by the mayor if he would only approve of someone who holds his same philosophy, his reply was “that is my right.” Referencing the First amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Thus he verbally confirmed his vote would be in opposition of 1.66 RESPONSIBILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICE and discharging faithfully the duties of their offices regardless of personal considerations, recognizing that the public interest must be in their prime concern.
· Also at the CC meeting on April 21st. he stated “I’m concerned about the morality of this city.” This statement seems to suggest his personal opinion about the homosexual themed books in the public library is immoral. Here again, it is his personal opinion and not necessarily that of the majority in the city or even his own jurisdiction, but leaning more towards those who filed the complaint against the library. Again another violation of injecting personal opinion.
· At a later date he was quoted in the Daily News regarding the policy and procedures the library board must follow for all complaints. Alderman Vrana stated “I don’t care what policy is I want those books out of there.” Again a clear violation of the same section noted above.
If a city alderman is entrusted as a representative of West Bend and elected to uphold all of the cities policies and procedures but does not have respect for other agencies policies and procedures how can that person be trusted to uphold the policies he is to safeguard. That he will not invoke the same personal philosophy of not caring what the policies are and pursue his own agenda of what he feels is correct; regardless of what the majority may deem appropriate or having the public interest as his prime concern.
The above are a small list of statements that he has made publicly regarding this issue. According to 1.66 RESPONSIBILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICE their conduct in both their official and private affairs should be above reproach so as to foster respect for all government. Alderman Vrana’s conduct has not followed that code as it is written.
I believe Mr. Vrana’s actions demonstrate that in his official duties in this specific issue regarding the West Bend Library controversy, that 1) he did not act in an independent, impartial manner that was responsible to the people, 2) his conduct did not re-enforce the public's confidence in the integrity of the city government, 3) he used his aldermanic position to purport his personal philosophy not that of the city as a whole.
Therefore, I am requesting that a formal investigation be made by the ethics committee regarding this matter and appropriate measures be taken to rectify this.
Respectfully,
Kristina
( I left out my last name, address and phone number on this blog because it is not needed for this post. It was included in the complaint filed and it was notarized by a legal notary.)
Monday, May 11, 2009
A little thing called 14th Amendment
I would like to purpose a little history lesson here on the law. iIt has been a while for many of as far as school is concerned. We are so focused on the freedom to speak that we forget other things along the way. So here is yet another tiny morsel or our great country.
Now this may not sound practical here but this one can also be used. For either side of this issue. Here is where we get into due process, equal rights, etc. Yes, it speaks primarily of Civil War issues and added after the north won, but many of it's principals can be applied to the library issue as well. Both sides are to have the right to due processTcomplaintants are trying to menuvure through that now. The debate is did they or do they need to re - file for clarification purposes? All I know is what the law entitles both side to.
The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was one of the amendments enacted after the Civil War. This amendment was one of the Reconstruction Amendments, along with the Thirteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. It was adopted on July 9, 1868.
The amendment provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) which had excluded slaves and their descendants from possessing Constitutional rights. The amendment requires states to provide equal protection under the law to all people within their jurisdictions and was used in the mid-20th century to dismantle racial segregation in the United States, as in Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Its Due Process Clause has been used to apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states. This clause has also been used to create: (1) substantive due process rights, such as parental and marriage rights; and (2) procedural due process rights requiring that certain steps, such as a hearing, be followed before a person's property interest can be taken away. The amendment also includes a number of clauses dealing with former slaves and Confederate states, but these clauses are either little-used or have been supplanted by subsequent changes in the law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Now this may not sound practical here but this one can also be used. For either side of this issue. Here is where we get into due process, equal rights, etc. Yes, it speaks primarily of Civil War issues and added after the north won, but many of it's principals can be applied to the library issue as well. Both sides are to have the right to due processTcomplaintants are trying to menuvure through that now. The debate is did they or do they need to re - file for clarification purposes? All I know is what the law entitles both side to.
The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was one of the amendments enacted after the Civil War. This amendment was one of the Reconstruction Amendments, along with the Thirteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. It was adopted on July 9, 1868.
The amendment provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) which had excluded slaves and their descendants from possessing Constitutional rights. The amendment requires states to provide equal protection under the law to all people within their jurisdictions and was used in the mid-20th century to dismantle racial segregation in the United States, as in Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Its Due Process Clause has been used to apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states. This clause has also been used to create: (1) substantive due process rights, such as parental and marriage rights; and (2) procedural due process rights requiring that certain steps, such as a hearing, be followed before a person's property interest can be taken away. The amendment also includes a number of clauses dealing with former slaves and Confederate states, but these clauses are either little-used or have been supplanted by subsequent changes in the law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Just one First Amendment example
A Book Named "John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure" v. Attorney General of Massachusetts
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS
No. 368 Argued: December 7-8, 1965 --- Decided: March 21, 1966
Appellee, the Attorney General of Massachusetts, brought this civil equity action for an adjudication of obscenity of Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure (Fanny Hill), and appellant publisher intervened. Following a hearing, including expert testimony and other evidence, assessing the book's character but not the mode of distribution, the trial court decreed the book obscene and not entitled to the protection of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed, holding that a patently offensive book which appeals to prurient interest need not be unqualifiedly worthless before it can be deemed obscene.
Held: The judgment is reversed. Pp. 415-433.
MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE and MR. JUSTICE FORTAS, concluded that:
1. Under the test in Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, as elaborated in subsequent cases, each of three elements must independently be satisfied before a book can be held obscene: (a) the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to a prurient interest in sex; (b) the material is patently offensive because it affronts contemporary community standards relating to the description or representation of sexual matters, and (c) the material is utterly without redeeming social value. P. 418.
2. Since a book cannot be proscribed as obscene unless found to be utterly without redeeming social value, the Supreme Judicial Court erroneously interpreted the federal constitutional standard. Pp. 419-420.
3. On the premise, not assessed here, that it has the requisite prurient appeal, is patently offensive, and has only a modicum of social importance, evidence of commercial exploitation of the book for the sake of prurient appeal to the exclusion of all other values [p414] might in different proceeding justify the conclusion that the publication and distribution of Memoirs was not constitutionally protected. Ginzburg v. United States, post, p. 463. Pp. 420-421.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK and MR. JUSTICE STEWART concur in the reversal for the reasons given in their respective dissenting opinions in Ginzburg v. United States, post, p. 476 and p. 497 and Mishkin v. New York, post, p. 515 and p. 518. P. 421.
MR JUSTICE DOUGLAS concluded that:
1. Since the First Amendment forbids censorship of expression of ideas not linked with illegal action, Fanny Hill cannot be proscribed. Pp. 426; 427-433.
2. Even under the prevailing view of the Roth test the book cannot be held to be obscene in view of substantial evidence showing that it has literary, historical, and social importance. P. 426.
3. Since there is no power under the First Amendment to control mere expression, the manner in which a book that concededly has social worth is advertised and sold is irrelevant. P. 427.
4. There is no basis in history for the view expressed in Roth that "obscene" speech is "outside" the protection of the First Amendment. Pp. 428-431.
5. No interest of society justifies overriding the guarantees of free speech and press and establishing a regime of censorship. Pp. 431-433.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS
No. 368 Argued: December 7-8, 1965 --- Decided: March 21, 1966
Appellee, the Attorney General of Massachusetts, brought this civil equity action for an adjudication of obscenity of Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure (Fanny Hill), and appellant publisher intervened. Following a hearing, including expert testimony and other evidence, assessing the book's character but not the mode of distribution, the trial court decreed the book obscene and not entitled to the protection of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed, holding that a patently offensive book which appeals to prurient interest need not be unqualifiedly worthless before it can be deemed obscene.
Held: The judgment is reversed. Pp. 415-433.
MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE and MR. JUSTICE FORTAS, concluded that:
1. Under the test in Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, as elaborated in subsequent cases, each of three elements must independently be satisfied before a book can be held obscene: (a) the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to a prurient interest in sex; (b) the material is patently offensive because it affronts contemporary community standards relating to the description or representation of sexual matters, and (c) the material is utterly without redeeming social value. P. 418.
2. Since a book cannot be proscribed as obscene unless found to be utterly without redeeming social value, the Supreme Judicial Court erroneously interpreted the federal constitutional standard. Pp. 419-420.
3. On the premise, not assessed here, that it has the requisite prurient appeal, is patently offensive, and has only a modicum of social importance, evidence of commercial exploitation of the book for the sake of prurient appeal to the exclusion of all other values [p414] might in different proceeding justify the conclusion that the publication and distribution of Memoirs was not constitutionally protected. Ginzburg v. United States, post, p. 463. Pp. 420-421.
MR. JUSTICE BLACK and MR. JUSTICE STEWART concur in the reversal for the reasons given in their respective dissenting opinions in Ginzburg v. United States, post, p. 476 and p. 497 and Mishkin v. New York, post, p. 515 and p. 518. P. 421.
MR JUSTICE DOUGLAS concluded that:
1. Since the First Amendment forbids censorship of expression of ideas not linked with illegal action, Fanny Hill cannot be proscribed. Pp. 426; 427-433.
2. Even under the prevailing view of the Roth test the book cannot be held to be obscene in view of substantial evidence showing that it has literary, historical, and social importance. P. 426.
3. Since there is no power under the First Amendment to control mere expression, the manner in which a book that concededly has social worth is advertised and sold is irrelevant. P. 427.
4. There is no basis in history for the view expressed in Roth that "obscene" speech is "outside" the protection of the First Amendment. Pp. 428-431.
5. No interest of society justifies overriding the guarantees of free speech and press and establishing a regime of censorship. Pp. 431-433.
Law and the Library A Christians perspective
Hang on this is a long one.
OK, it's my turn on my blog to speak some thoughts regarding some issues going on here in my small middle American town. We have not been under a negative spot light for anything until now. Yes, we are a suburb of Milwaukee that has in the past hit a great deal of negative number ones. For instance in the mid to late eighties I think I remember hearing that Milwaukee was number one for the national teenage pregnancy rate. So maybe we were in the shadow of that for a bit.
However, now in the 21st. century my little town is embattled in a constitutional tug if war. So what is the amendment being challenged? What else free speech. Yes, I know that we hear that a lot. However, this is one is really an all or nothing.
There is a local couple that filed a complaint against our little local public library. Stating that they have pornography on the shelves. What they are pointing to are books in the young adult section, on a total different level of the building also where the adult section is and a level away from the children's books. These are books written towards the LGBT youth. In case you do not know what that is it's a label and classification for youth that proclaim they are gay.
OK, now let me say I have said from the beginning that I do not agree with the mentality or behavior of those who engage in the boundaries of the homosexual lifestyle.
I wrote a letter to the editor of the paper (which I will put below this post.) In a nut shell I voiced my opinion that the action this couple took is something I do not agree with. I wrote in support of our library. It is there for everyone not only for those who espouse to be christian. I say this simply because after my letter ran I began to receive horrible phone calls at home. Attacking me as a Christian, threatening myself and my 78 year old mother. Calling me horrible names and telling me I am going to hell. This was all done under the banner that the callers were Christians. I had to turn ringers off of phones so she would not to hear many of the things that I heard.
So now there are two factions in our city. The couple that filed the complaint and her group, and the other side fighting for free speech. Here in lays the entire debate. I will say I have followed blogs and comments on both sides. The complainants were loud enough that our city counsel (our government) did not re-seat 4 members of the library board that were up for reconsideration for another term. They are nominated by the mayor. The counsel spoke out and said no to these 4. Stating their own opinions about the issue and not knowing all the facts of positions of those in the jurisdictions they represent. My opinion there. They said they are upset that the library board has stalled and drug this issue out as long as they have. The history and time line of the complaint speaks for itself.
Well OK now let me say there is a process that all complaints that get filed with the library must go through. It's a 3 step process. Meetings with the library director and I can't remember who else, and the 3rd step is taking it to the board which in turn is or can be a public forum. We got to the 3rd stage and the board meeting. It was so well attended that the fire marshal had to cancel the meeting because the room was over capacity and in violation of the fire code. Mind you this was after the meeting had been moved twice to larger venues.
The complainants since then have continued to be very vocal. They may not even realize that they have changed their position and argument at least in public several times. First remove the books completely from the shelves and building. To no, lets add books to balance out the gay issue, (that I did agree with adding books not taking away) and then after several more turns to now they want the library to change it's policy and to move them to adult section, and create a labeling system where minors cannot check them out without parental approval. Even though the National Library Association has already cleared these for the young adult section.
Now, let me say I have not changed my position. However, what I will say is there have been disappointing moments in this battle on both sides. There have been so many personal attacks on the both side of the aisle. I too have even lobbed a few in the beginning out of sheer anger, but offer that as no excuse. For that I do apologize. However, since that time I have come to realize that there is no need for personal attacks against the opposition when one has the precedent of a very thoroughly challenged law on their side.
While this is not a popular stance from the Christian perspective if one stands back and looks at the bigger picture they will understand that is the same argument that protects them as well.
In case you don't know the First Amendment of The United States guarantees free speech. Now this can get touchy but follow me through if you will. I am not fighting for or against the gay issue. I have put that to rest. Everyone knows where I stand on that one that is clear. I stand on my countries promise. If these books are moved, removed, or censored via labeling or regulating via parental consent than there will need to be people hired to go through every book on the shelves and red line anything that can be objectionable to anyone. Who will that be? Who will decide what is cleared or not? Will it be a Christian and an atheist? You get the point there. Every single book in that building someone can find something objectionable in them. So that is not logical.
Also, if these books are reclassified and the complainants are successful then what will be next? Will the people that oppose Christianity (remember the guy who went public filing a civil case with the supreme court stating he is an atheist and does not want his daughter to be forced to recite the pledge of allegiance at the beginning of her school day because it says under God?) Do you see there this is going now? If someone came in and filed a complaint that the Bible offends them, books regarding all faiths are offensive and wanted them removed. Even is they used the separation of church and state argument if the current complainants succeed there would be no legal grounds to keep the Bible and other books there. They would use this circumstance against us and win. At that point what books do we have left? You know that someone would end up testing the precedent this would set. That can't happen.
If people took a step back and looked into the future they would see that legally there is no grounds for this. Morally OK there may be a point but who is he final judge on that? God - CORRECT! not man! These books are not pornography. They are novels written for youth.
I will say one of my issues besides the legality of this is those that say this is not a gay issue. Unfortunately that is exactly what some people on both sides have made it to be. Not to mention what is the "christian" example being set for the youth to make church welcoming to them so they are given the opportunity to re - examine their choices if they want? Why are people not taking into consideration we are talking about teenagers whose frontal lobe of the brain has not reach full development and thus they have no concept of long term consequence of their immediate behavior? If you doubt that research it. It is fact. As teens all they know is they want it and want it now. Think about what you thought you believed as a teen? Have you ever done something stupid in your youth that you look back on now and wonder what you were thinking? Lord knows I have. Too many to count, I gave up that venture.
Not to mention many people scream that they want the government to stop telling them how to raise their own children. Yet, these are the same faction that are now asking the government to help "protect" all children. One voice or opinion should not have the authority to tell others how to raise their children. Or what morals or values they should install in them. That is nobodies place but the parents of said child, children.
At what point do we look at the parents and say we understand with the economy both parents must work but you choose to be parents. You made that decision. You have a responsibility to them to teach them according to your own values and beliefs in God, Allah, Buddha, whatever. I choose Christ. You have to know that when it comes time to turn your baby out into the world to begin their own lives independent of the parents you know you have done the very best you could and now they need to stand in the world on their own. We throw our kids out into the world some for the first time when they go to college and we hope and pray we have done our jobs. Parents no matter how many times you teen tunes you out, ignores what you say, your words are still going into their minds. They really do register them and you really are your child's best compass into adulthood. Peers are important but studies have shown that when it comes to many of the big choices in life children pull from their experiences and what they have been taught by parents or other strong authority figures in their lives. It's true. Trust your kids, believe in them, have faith in them and yourselves. Yes, children falter and make poor choices from time to time, but they will learn. You will still be there to help them and clarify things for them as they learn to navigate things for themselves. It will be the voice of the parents that will whisper ever so softly in their ear "No, don't do that." or whatever.
I also wonder at what point is far enough for someone to yell stop, think about what you are asking for. If the constitution protects the freedom of speech within the parameters of law, (you can't yell fire in a crowded theater, or threaten any ones life to name a few) than it is there for EVERYONE! It is at that point where the individual has to make a choice to read those books or not. I choose not to. That is part of God's plan by not making us robots that automatically follow Him. We have to make that choice on our own, and teach our biggest commodities for the future, the children, the same.
If these complainants succeed we as Christians will also loose our right to freedom of expression. So now it is time to take a stand. I stand on the law of the land and God's word. I choose not to read material that would not please the one who died for me. Educate educate educate your children. Trust your children and have faith in them to make the decisions in their lives that would also please Him if that if your values. Know that the First Amendment is not a simple excuse for smut. Think of it as an avenue that will allow future generations to go to a library and look at a Bible, research their faith, look at a concordance, read books about their faith. It is there to protect our lifestyle and beliefs as well.
Don't attack the people you disagree with look at the issue and choose a position. We are not living in the 50's anymore. Kids have access to all kinds of things we need to talk more to our children than ever before. It really is quality over quantity.
The following is simply a very small example of cases that has been fought some in lower courts most in at least a state supreme court. All have challenged some aspect of the Constitution and First Amendment and lost. Miller v California or griswald v connetticut or sund v wichita falls tx. Or reno v united states, Roth V United States to name a few.
Ok, so now I will display my original letter to the paper that got me into this issue. You will also see some posts after this with other information. One an actual first amendment case, the next on a little didy called the 14th amendment that also comes into play here.
I thank you if you actually read this in it's entirity. Please excuse grammatics and posible spelling errors I am very tired.
Letter to paper:
I have a few points I would like to make regarding the library controversy.
First it is a public library and not a private one. Therefore they are mandated to not discriminate on any level against anyone. Just ask the school board who included a new harassment policy called "protected class."
Second, I may not agree with the gay and lesbian lifestyle however, I will not stand in judgment of those who either question the possibly or live in it. It is their choice to make not mine. Would you rather have your children be alive and trying to find a way through their life as every other teen must do and be a positive contributing member of society or dead and not have the choice? I say this simply because if you look at the many Hollywood A listers who have "come out of the proverbial closet" they have spoken about the thousands and thousands of letters they received from young people saying they were ready to end their life because they could not face the persecution of family, friends or their churches about their decision, but because this A lister came out they feel that they can now too. Strength can be contagious like many other things. I would rather have a child or teen live then kill themselves out of fear of what others may think or do.
My last point is the names the library is in memory of as well as The Cancer Care Center Alyce and Elmore Kraemer are my great Aunt and Uncle. Through the years of hearing my dad talk about them and knowing that Alice had once been a teacher I do not think she would object to these resources being available to those that either need or want them.
Every choice or decision needs to be made through education. That is what she believed and I happen to agree. Sometimes that education is not given at home and is sought from different places. If opposed at home and the young person is still needing answers why not the public library?
To those opposed to this content on the Libraries web site teach the morals in your home and church and do not try and force a publicly funded institution to do it. Especially one who's primary goal is to provide unbiased information and resources.
I may not live my life from the homosexual perspective and I am not a proponent of it, but I am also not going to throw stones and judge anyone else who does choose that course. We need to teach our children tolerance of all differences that as Martin Luther King Jr. preached we do not accomplish our goals via violence and hate, but through tolerance, understanding, and education.
This community is good at arguing via the paper about things that in the end are things we need to be teaching our children at home. Not in our schools or our public buildings. If for instance the library dropped all their pro Bush, Pro conservative or Republican links and placed only Liberal agendas or pro Obama links that would be discrimination correct? That would create a public outcry right? The library would not do that because they are an unbiased institution. Try it, you too may enjoy it, and maybe even a little bit more peace about things instead of getting so angry and frustrated about things you feel our public institutions should be teaching when by law they cannot. Spend that energy teaching children to know people are different and to be tolerant of the differences even if you do not approve of the choices made or behavior exhibited. It will take them far further in life.
Respectfully,
Kristina
P.S. I will be monitering all comments from this point forward. I will decide what will be posted. I will not discriminate based on opinion. I will only filter for content related to topic. No bashing, personal attacks, on either side will be tolerated.
OK, it's my turn on my blog to speak some thoughts regarding some issues going on here in my small middle American town. We have not been under a negative spot light for anything until now. Yes, we are a suburb of Milwaukee that has in the past hit a great deal of negative number ones. For instance in the mid to late eighties I think I remember hearing that Milwaukee was number one for the national teenage pregnancy rate. So maybe we were in the shadow of that for a bit.
However, now in the 21st. century my little town is embattled in a constitutional tug if war. So what is the amendment being challenged? What else free speech. Yes, I know that we hear that a lot. However, this is one is really an all or nothing.
There is a local couple that filed a complaint against our little local public library. Stating that they have pornography on the shelves. What they are pointing to are books in the young adult section, on a total different level of the building also where the adult section is and a level away from the children's books. These are books written towards the LGBT youth. In case you do not know what that is it's a label and classification for youth that proclaim they are gay.
OK, now let me say I have said from the beginning that I do not agree with the mentality or behavior of those who engage in the boundaries of the homosexual lifestyle.
I wrote a letter to the editor of the paper (which I will put below this post.) In a nut shell I voiced my opinion that the action this couple took is something I do not agree with. I wrote in support of our library. It is there for everyone not only for those who espouse to be christian. I say this simply because after my letter ran I began to receive horrible phone calls at home. Attacking me as a Christian, threatening myself and my 78 year old mother. Calling me horrible names and telling me I am going to hell. This was all done under the banner that the callers were Christians. I had to turn ringers off of phones so she would not to hear many of the things that I heard.
So now there are two factions in our city. The couple that filed the complaint and her group, and the other side fighting for free speech. Here in lays the entire debate. I will say I have followed blogs and comments on both sides. The complainants were loud enough that our city counsel (our government) did not re-seat 4 members of the library board that were up for reconsideration for another term. They are nominated by the mayor. The counsel spoke out and said no to these 4. Stating their own opinions about the issue and not knowing all the facts of positions of those in the jurisdictions they represent. My opinion there. They said they are upset that the library board has stalled and drug this issue out as long as they have. The history and time line of the complaint speaks for itself.
Well OK now let me say there is a process that all complaints that get filed with the library must go through. It's a 3 step process. Meetings with the library director and I can't remember who else, and the 3rd step is taking it to the board which in turn is or can be a public forum. We got to the 3rd stage and the board meeting. It was so well attended that the fire marshal had to cancel the meeting because the room was over capacity and in violation of the fire code. Mind you this was after the meeting had been moved twice to larger venues.
The complainants since then have continued to be very vocal. They may not even realize that they have changed their position and argument at least in public several times. First remove the books completely from the shelves and building. To no, lets add books to balance out the gay issue, (that I did agree with adding books not taking away) and then after several more turns to now they want the library to change it's policy and to move them to adult section, and create a labeling system where minors cannot check them out without parental approval. Even though the National Library Association has already cleared these for the young adult section.
Now, let me say I have not changed my position. However, what I will say is there have been disappointing moments in this battle on both sides. There have been so many personal attacks on the both side of the aisle. I too have even lobbed a few in the beginning out of sheer anger, but offer that as no excuse. For that I do apologize. However, since that time I have come to realize that there is no need for personal attacks against the opposition when one has the precedent of a very thoroughly challenged law on their side.
While this is not a popular stance from the Christian perspective if one stands back and looks at the bigger picture they will understand that is the same argument that protects them as well.
In case you don't know the First Amendment of The United States guarantees free speech. Now this can get touchy but follow me through if you will. I am not fighting for or against the gay issue. I have put that to rest. Everyone knows where I stand on that one that is clear. I stand on my countries promise. If these books are moved, removed, or censored via labeling or regulating via parental consent than there will need to be people hired to go through every book on the shelves and red line anything that can be objectionable to anyone. Who will that be? Who will decide what is cleared or not? Will it be a Christian and an atheist? You get the point there. Every single book in that building someone can find something objectionable in them. So that is not logical.
Also, if these books are reclassified and the complainants are successful then what will be next? Will the people that oppose Christianity (remember the guy who went public filing a civil case with the supreme court stating he is an atheist and does not want his daughter to be forced to recite the pledge of allegiance at the beginning of her school day because it says under God?) Do you see there this is going now? If someone came in and filed a complaint that the Bible offends them, books regarding all faiths are offensive and wanted them removed. Even is they used the separation of church and state argument if the current complainants succeed there would be no legal grounds to keep the Bible and other books there. They would use this circumstance against us and win. At that point what books do we have left? You know that someone would end up testing the precedent this would set. That can't happen.
If people took a step back and looked into the future they would see that legally there is no grounds for this. Morally OK there may be a point but who is he final judge on that? God - CORRECT! not man! These books are not pornography. They are novels written for youth.
I will say one of my issues besides the legality of this is those that say this is not a gay issue. Unfortunately that is exactly what some people on both sides have made it to be. Not to mention what is the "christian" example being set for the youth to make church welcoming to them so they are given the opportunity to re - examine their choices if they want? Why are people not taking into consideration we are talking about teenagers whose frontal lobe of the brain has not reach full development and thus they have no concept of long term consequence of their immediate behavior? If you doubt that research it. It is fact. As teens all they know is they want it and want it now. Think about what you thought you believed as a teen? Have you ever done something stupid in your youth that you look back on now and wonder what you were thinking? Lord knows I have. Too many to count, I gave up that venture.
Not to mention many people scream that they want the government to stop telling them how to raise their own children. Yet, these are the same faction that are now asking the government to help "protect" all children. One voice or opinion should not have the authority to tell others how to raise their children. Or what morals or values they should install in them. That is nobodies place but the parents of said child, children.
At what point do we look at the parents and say we understand with the economy both parents must work but you choose to be parents. You made that decision. You have a responsibility to them to teach them according to your own values and beliefs in God, Allah, Buddha, whatever. I choose Christ. You have to know that when it comes time to turn your baby out into the world to begin their own lives independent of the parents you know you have done the very best you could and now they need to stand in the world on their own. We throw our kids out into the world some for the first time when they go to college and we hope and pray we have done our jobs. Parents no matter how many times you teen tunes you out, ignores what you say, your words are still going into their minds. They really do register them and you really are your child's best compass into adulthood. Peers are important but studies have shown that when it comes to many of the big choices in life children pull from their experiences and what they have been taught by parents or other strong authority figures in their lives. It's true. Trust your kids, believe in them, have faith in them and yourselves. Yes, children falter and make poor choices from time to time, but they will learn. You will still be there to help them and clarify things for them as they learn to navigate things for themselves. It will be the voice of the parents that will whisper ever so softly in their ear "No, don't do that." or whatever.
I also wonder at what point is far enough for someone to yell stop, think about what you are asking for. If the constitution protects the freedom of speech within the parameters of law, (you can't yell fire in a crowded theater, or threaten any ones life to name a few) than it is there for EVERYONE! It is at that point where the individual has to make a choice to read those books or not. I choose not to. That is part of God's plan by not making us robots that automatically follow Him. We have to make that choice on our own, and teach our biggest commodities for the future, the children, the same.
If these complainants succeed we as Christians will also loose our right to freedom of expression. So now it is time to take a stand. I stand on the law of the land and God's word. I choose not to read material that would not please the one who died for me. Educate educate educate your children. Trust your children and have faith in them to make the decisions in their lives that would also please Him if that if your values. Know that the First Amendment is not a simple excuse for smut. Think of it as an avenue that will allow future generations to go to a library and look at a Bible, research their faith, look at a concordance, read books about their faith. It is there to protect our lifestyle and beliefs as well.
Don't attack the people you disagree with look at the issue and choose a position. We are not living in the 50's anymore. Kids have access to all kinds of things we need to talk more to our children than ever before. It really is quality over quantity.
The following is simply a very small example of cases that has been fought some in lower courts most in at least a state supreme court. All have challenged some aspect of the Constitution and First Amendment and lost. Miller v California or griswald v connetticut or sund v wichita falls tx. Or reno v united states, Roth V United States to name a few.
Ok, so now I will display my original letter to the paper that got me into this issue. You will also see some posts after this with other information. One an actual first amendment case, the next on a little didy called the 14th amendment that also comes into play here.
I thank you if you actually read this in it's entirity. Please excuse grammatics and posible spelling errors I am very tired.
Letter to paper:
I have a few points I would like to make regarding the library controversy.
First it is a public library and not a private one. Therefore they are mandated to not discriminate on any level against anyone. Just ask the school board who included a new harassment policy called "protected class."
Second, I may not agree with the gay and lesbian lifestyle however, I will not stand in judgment of those who either question the possibly or live in it. It is their choice to make not mine. Would you rather have your children be alive and trying to find a way through their life as every other teen must do and be a positive contributing member of society or dead and not have the choice? I say this simply because if you look at the many Hollywood A listers who have "come out of the proverbial closet" they have spoken about the thousands and thousands of letters they received from young people saying they were ready to end their life because they could not face the persecution of family, friends or their churches about their decision, but because this A lister came out they feel that they can now too. Strength can be contagious like many other things. I would rather have a child or teen live then kill themselves out of fear of what others may think or do.
My last point is the names the library is in memory of as well as The Cancer Care Center Alyce and Elmore Kraemer are my great Aunt and Uncle. Through the years of hearing my dad talk about them and knowing that Alice had once been a teacher I do not think she would object to these resources being available to those that either need or want them.
Every choice or decision needs to be made through education. That is what she believed and I happen to agree. Sometimes that education is not given at home and is sought from different places. If opposed at home and the young person is still needing answers why not the public library?
To those opposed to this content on the Libraries web site teach the morals in your home and church and do not try and force a publicly funded institution to do it. Especially one who's primary goal is to provide unbiased information and resources.
I may not live my life from the homosexual perspective and I am not a proponent of it, but I am also not going to throw stones and judge anyone else who does choose that course. We need to teach our children tolerance of all differences that as Martin Luther King Jr. preached we do not accomplish our goals via violence and hate, but through tolerance, understanding, and education.
This community is good at arguing via the paper about things that in the end are things we need to be teaching our children at home. Not in our schools or our public buildings. If for instance the library dropped all their pro Bush, Pro conservative or Republican links and placed only Liberal agendas or pro Obama links that would be discrimination correct? That would create a public outcry right? The library would not do that because they are an unbiased institution. Try it, you too may enjoy it, and maybe even a little bit more peace about things instead of getting so angry and frustrated about things you feel our public institutions should be teaching when by law they cannot. Spend that energy teaching children to know people are different and to be tolerant of the differences even if you do not approve of the choices made or behavior exhibited. It will take them far further in life.
Respectfully,
Kristina
P.S. I will be monitering all comments from this point forward. I will decide what will be posted. I will not discriminate based on opinion. I will only filter for content related to topic. No bashing, personal attacks, on either side will be tolerated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)