Showing posts with label Petition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Petition. Show all posts

Saturday, September 16, 2023

Notice and Demand: Withdraw NH State Library and NH Library Association Membership from ALA

Below in full is a form letter New Hampshire people can sign to demand the New Hampshire State Library [@nhsl] and New Hampshire Library Association withdraw from the American Library Association [@ALALibrary].  Source for the form for those interested:
I note some of the basis for the contents of this form can be sourced to the new World Library Association [@WLibraryA].  I am happy WLA is starting to make a difference.  Send the URL of this page or the form itself above to all your friends and families in New Hampshire.



Notice and Demand

Withdraw NH State Library and NH Library Association Membership from ALA

Legal Notice and Warning

To: 
Sarah L. Stewart, Commissioner
NH Department of Natural & Cultural Resources

Representative Mike Drago

From the people of New Hampshire and the following New Hampshire House Representatives:
Representative Arlene Quaratiello [@ArleneQforNHRep]
Representative Jake Brouillard
Representative Karen Reid
Representative Kristine Perez
Representative Riché Colcombe

_______________________


Notice to agent is Notice to Principal and Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent  



I,  , one of the people, as seen in New Hampshire Constitution Bill of Rights Article 1, Sui Juris, am serving Sarah L. Stewart, Commissioner of the NH Department of Cultural and Natural Resources, and Mike Drago, a member of the NH Legislature, with due notice; so that you, as agents of the people, may provide due care and remember your oath which binds you.
 
New Hampshire Constitution Part 2 Article 84. [Oath of Civil Officers.] Any person chosen governor, councilor, senator, or representative, military or civil officer, (town officers excepted) accepting the trust, shall, before he proceeds to execute the duties of his office, make and subscribe the following declaration, viz.

I, A.B. do solemnly swear, that I will bear faith and true allegiance to the United States of America and the state of New Hampshire, and will support the constitution thereof. So help me God.

Maxim of Law 84c. Punishment is due if the words of an oath be false. Black's, 840.

New Hampshire Constitution Part 1 Article 8. [Accountability of Magistrates and Officers; Public’s Right to Know.] All power residing originally in, and being derived from, the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them.

Maxim of Law 4d. An agent is a person authorized by another to act on his account and under his control. Wasilowski v. Park Bridge Corp., 156 F.2d 612, 614.

Take notice that the diffusion of knowledge and literature in the public realm is an expressly delegated authority in the trust indenture contract called the New Hampshire Constitution. The expressed end of the diffusion of knowledge is to promote the preservation of free government. The historical usage/customs analysis from the time of the adoption of the constitution is clear regarding what is permissible use of taxpayer funds for the encouragement of literature. Where the constitution expresses a duty, it must be strictly adhered to. No interpretation is allowed. Furthermore, only the authority that is expressed is in fact granted; no further grant is permitted; and any other authority taken other than what is expressly granted is an unlawful trespass.
 
Maxim of Law: That which is granted or reserved in a certain specified form must be taken as it is granted, and will not be permitted to be made the subject of any adjustment or compensation on the part of the grantee. Ex. parte Miller, 2 Hill (NY) 423; Bacon, Max. 26, reg. 4.
 
Maxim of Law 43b. The expression of one thing is the exclusion of another. Co. Litt. 210a; Broom, Max. 3d ed. 596; Pearson v. Lord, 6 Mass. 81, 84.
 
New Hampshire Constitution Part 2 Article 83. [Encouragement of Literature, etc.; Control of Corporations, Monopolies, etc.] Knowledge and learning, generally diffused through a community, being essential to the preservation of a free government; and spreading the opportunities and advantages of education through the various parts of the country, being highly conducive to promote this end; it shall be the duty of the legislators and magistrates, in all future periods of this government, to cherish the interest of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries and public schools, to encourage private and public institutions, rewards, and immunities for the promotion of agriculture, arts, sciences, commerce, trades, manufactures, and natural history of the country; to countenance and inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and economy, honesty and punctuality, sincerity, sobriety, and all social affections, and generous sentiments, among the people: Provided, nevertheless, that no money raised by taxation shall ever be granted or applied for the use of the schools of institutions of any religious sect or denomination.
 
Take notice that the legal form of law must be followed. The People of New Hampshire granted you powers to protect their rights, property, and liberty interests. Not following form of law, which is expressly written in the trust indenture known as the constitution, directly harms the people. Harming the people by depriving inherent rights is an irreparable injury. As a servant and trustee of the people, failure to perform will not stand.
 
Maxim of Law 46b. Legal form is essential form. 10 Coke, 100.

"CONSTITUTION. In American law. The written instrument agreed upon by the people of the Union or of a particular state, as the absolute rule of action and decision for all departments and officers of the government in respect to all the points covered by it, which must control until it shall be changed by the authority which established it, and in opposition to which any act or ordinance of any such department or officer is null and void." 
Cooley, Const. Lim. 3. Black’s. 4th ed.

Take notice that you are hereby made aware that Marxist ideology is being perpetrated by ALA president Emily Drabinski, a self-described Marxist, and member of the Democratic Socialists of America, to force Marxist ideologies on communities across the state against the will of the people.

Take notice that Ms. Drabinski has promised to “advance a public agenda that puts organizing for justice at the center of library work.” In a 2013 publication titled Queering the Catalog: Queer Theory and the Politics of Correction she supported the idea of forcing librarians to become politically engaged. She further stated at the 2023 Socialism conference in Chicago, "Public education needs to be a site of socialist organizing. I think libraries really do too. ...Classroom libraries, but also school libraries of all kinds." She concluded that "We need to be on the agenda of socialist organizing."
 
Take notice that Marxist ideology is contrary to the liberty interests of the People and the form of government you swore to protect. By allowing Marxist ideology to be knowingly brought into public libraries, you are in violation of your expressly delegated duties and the fundamental principles of law in New Hampshire.
 
Take notice that the law precludes a decision on any matter to be made on the grounds of cultural zeitgeist; it is of no consequence if some people or persons in our society promulgate the idea that Marxism is acceptable, regardless of their reasoning. In the words and actions of ALA president Emily Drabinski, she and the ALA are actively promoting Marxist ideology by organizing ALA member librarians and trustees against the wishes of the communities they claim to serve. Again, the expressed purpose of public education and funding for public libraries is to promote the preservation of a free government. The law is clear.
 
Maxim of Law 39y. Principles prove, they are not proved. 3 Coke, 40. Fundamental principles require no proof; or, in Lord Coke's words, "they ought to be approved, because they cannot be proved." 3 Coke, 50a.

Take notice that we do not live in a democracy where a majority, or even a vocal minority, has any right to subvert the law or control the rights of others. Rather, we live in a constitutional republic where the rule of law is written; and all lawful laws must be obeyed. In a constitutional republic, our form of government is found in the strict guidelines laid out in the grants of powers; and antecedent to all governments, our individual rights are guaranteed and not to be questioned. It is therefore against the trust reposed in government to promote any ideologies that collective privileges or grievances are somehow of higher authority than individual rights given to us by God. Since the foundation of the law of the land is clear on the matter, it is maladministration for any public servant to permit the promotion of any form of Marxist or Socialist ideology that is contrary to our republican form of government.

Kentucky Constitution Bill of Rights Section 2: Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority.

Maxim of Law 51a. The government cannot load a citizen with imposition against his will or consent. 2 Coke, 61.

Maxim of Law 51b. The government is to be subject to the law, for the law makes the government. C.L.M.

Maxim of Law 51c. Obedience makes government, not the name by which it is called. C.L.M.

Take notice that the New Hampshire Library Association (NHLA) is a member of the American Library Association (ALA). The ALA is promoting the diffusion of inappropriate material in public libraries across New Hampshire as well as other states. Recently, Montana and Texas have taken the lead in standing for the rights of the People by cutting ties with the ALA because of the ALA's stance on using libraries as places to gather collective power and sew public discourse.

Take notice that as a servant or trustee, you contracted with the people. The common law is the law of the land. The People have a guaranteed right to redress any harm against them. The People have in personam jurisdiction over their servants and trustees at all times. It is the duty and responsibility of the People to teach you the law and keep you safe and from making errors. You have been notified, and this will now stand as evidence in any court of record.

Maxim of Law 92aa. The deprivation of any rights may be punished. Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. (71 U.S.) 277, 320.

New Hampshire Constitution Part 1 Article 7. [State Sovereignty.] The people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in Congress assembled.

Take notice that I, one of the People, for the reasons stated above, order Sarah L. Stewart, Commissioner of the Department of Cultural and Natural Resources, to immediately withdraw the New Hampshire State Library and the New Hampshire Library Association membership(s) from the American Library Association; and for House Representative Mike Drago to ensure that my order is carried out. In the event that Commissioner Stewart does not comply within three (3) business days of receiving this notice, I further instruct said Representative to form an investigatory committee and begin impeachment proceedings, by the authority vested in them in NH Constitution Part 2 Articles 17 and 38.

Maxim of Law 52b. When anything is granted to another, that also is granted without which the thing granted would be of no effect, or cannot exist. 11 Coke, 52; Shep. Touch. 89; Hob. 234; 3 Kent, Comm. 421; Ienk. Cent. 32 case 63; Co. Litt. 56a; People v. Hicks, 15 Barb. (N.Y.) 153, 160.

Maxim of Law: When anything is commanded, everything by which it can be accomplished is also commanded. 5 Coke, 116.

Maxim of Law: One lawfully commanding must be obeyed. Jenk. Cent. 120.

Maxim of Law: Obedience is the essence of the law. 11 Coke, 100.

Take notice that the People have found at times that servants and trustees are getting false information from private associations called (BAR Assoc). These entities are not government nor are they public. They did not contract with the People. If you take harmful advice against your Oath and the Trust Indentures known as the Constitutions, they cannot protect you from maladministration. Maladministration is the jurisdiction of the People, the highest authority. You contracted with the People.

Maxim of Law 24k. The contract makes the law. Black’s, 2d. 704; Bouv. 135; Allen v. Merch. Bank of N.Y., 22 Wend. (N.Y.) 215, 233.

Maxim of Law 57a. Ignorance of those things which one is bound to know excuses not. Hale, P.C. 42; Broom Max. 267; 4 bl. Comm. 27.

Maxim of Law 24j. Private contacts (or agreements) cannot derogate from public law or right. Dig. 50,17,144,1.
 
Maxim of Law 5h. There is no doubt that the rights of others cannot be prejudiced by private agreements. Dig. 2, 15, 3, pr.; Broom, Max. 623.
 
Take notice that as a servant of the People, you are also protected by the People's authority as you perform the good works and grants of power specifically laid out in the expressed public trust indenture known as the Constitution. All statutes are to be in pursuance of the Constitution, and we the People are aware of more corrections to be made. Let this Notice be your shield and armor to carry out your sworn duty without delay.

Please take final notice. As Trustees and Servants of the People, you must adhere to the New Hampshire Constitution, as all provisions are strictly mandatory. As Trustees and Servants of the People, if you believe these statements to be untrue, or if you believe that you have the authority to disregard the form of law and trample the inherent rights of the People by refusing to follow the demands in this notice, you must respond by affidavit, point by point sworn under the penalty of perjury showing where you derive authority to disobey these demands.
If you fail to show clear grants of constitutional authority, then your actions are a trespass against the People with full knowledge, intent, and malice. The People can and ought to be redressed of their grievances for their individual rights being trespassed. Any man or woman who decides to suppress this notice agrees to pay ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per infraction, and any disputes by any public officials or private actors who are bound by contract to the New Hampshire Constitution agree to have these matters heard before an Arbitrator of my choice to be bound thereby. All responses must be submitted by affidavit, point by point, sworn under penalty of perjury within seven (7) days of receiving this notice, or you agree, by acquiescence, that all statements in this notice are true and fact. Further, you agree that you are acting with full intent, knowledge, and malice by trespassing against the People and that no court shall be able to rehear this matter, but it shall stand as evidence, truth, and law in all courts of record.

Maxim of Law: It has been said, with much truth, "Where the law ends, tyranny begins." Merritt v. Welsh, 14 Otto (104 U.S.) 694, 702.
 
This notice is sent to you in peace and with the love of Christ so that you may provide due care to those who have all political power, the People.



URL of this page: 

 

Join World Library Association:

WorldLibraryAssociation.org

Thursday, August 27, 2015

Westfield Mom Calls for Filters on All Children's Computers at Library

Westfield Mom Calls for Filters on 

All Children's Computers at Library


By JILL D'AMBROSIO
TAP into Westfield
August 25, 2015 at 9:27 PM

WESTFIELD, NJ – Colby Sheppard, a Westfield mom who said her 11 year-old son stumbled upon pornography on a computer in the children's section of the Westfield Memorial Library in January, plans to create an online petition this fall and drum up local support to install filters on all computers with internet access in the library’s children’s section.

Sheppard has lobbied the library board of trustees and the town council on the matter. In April, the library installed filters on two of the four computers in the children’s section, but Sheppard wants to have all children’s computers equipped with filters.

She hoped the board would revisit the issue at its meeting on Aug. 20, but the meeting was canceled, she said. The next board meeting is scheduled for Sept. 24 at 7:30 p.m. in the library’s meeting room.

Sheppard says she has met with resistance from library officials on the question of filters.

“They’ve got their heels really dug into this one,” she said.

....

Enough Is Enough, a non-partisan organization dedicated to internet safety for kids, recommends “a layered approach of monitoring, filtering, time limiting, safe search settings among other tools to protect children," according to its website, www.enough.org, "but remember that these tools are no substitute for parental and adult supervision and guidance online."

....

Dan Kleinman, who co-founded SafeLibraries, a New Jesrey [sic] watchdog group, said that the Westfield library “is acting outside the law by allowing in porn and child porn despite the law.”

“Library law creates libraries for educational and recreational purposes for the use and benefit of the citizens. In other words, there are actual limits on what libraries can do,” Kleinman said. “They cannot do anything outside the law that created them. Porn is neither for the use nor benefit of the citizens, actually it harms the citizens, so it falls outside the law that created libraries. Municipal governments have the right and duty to stop libraries from acting outside the law, and they can do so without violating a library's veil of autonomy.

....

Source of above excerpts: TAP into Westfield (link) ©TAPinto.net 2015; hyperlinks in original, emphasis mine, original graphic omitted.

URL of this page: http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2015/08/westfield-mom.html

On Twitter: @ALALibrary @BarbStripling @EIETweets @OIF @TownOfWestfield @WestfieldTAP @WMLNJ


Saturday, January 24, 2015

Petition: Stop Porn in King County Libraries

Sign the petition to "Stop Pornography in King County Libraries (link)."  Here's the text of the petition:
We ask that the King County Library Board take immediate action to stop adults from openly watching pornography in our taxpayer funded libraries. 
To accomplish this, the King County Library Board needs to adopt a new internet public use policy.  This policy should disallow the removal of the Internet filter when requested by an adult library patron wishing to access usually blocked material.  The current policy is to remove the Internet filter at the request of such an adult patron. 
We suggest that the King County Library Board use the Internet Public Use Policy of the North Central Regional Library in eastern Washington as a model.  In the Washington Supreme Court Case of Bradburn v. North Central Regional Library of 2010, the court ruled that the North Central Regional Library can choose which collections to display and does not have to remove their Internet filter.  The North Central Library Internet policy blocks websites which include the following categories:
  • Adult Materials
  • Nudity and RisquĂ©
  • Pornography
  • Child Abuse (Child Pornography)
  • Image Search
  • Video Search
We would like to see the same content blocked in our libraries.  Please help us send this message to our library board!
I signed that petition.  Here is my comment:
That this petition is based on Bradburn v. NCRL (link) makes it very easy to sign as what's requested has already been proven in Washington state and federal courts to be perfectly legal.  Well done.  Here's more on that case: http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2013/04/HowToFilterLibraryComputers.html
This is based on more moms speaking out about their young children seeing pornography men are viewing in public libraries despite the law:
In this particular case, the King County Library System has been creating victims for years, could care less about them or even about the law and defrauding the federal government, and the King County government does nothing to stop the lawlessness and exposes itself to liability:
There are very few days per year the King County Library System does NOT serve pornography illegally.  This is one of them:
When will this ever stop?  We can start to stop it if you sign the petition, right now (link).


URL of this page: safelibraries.blogspot.com/2015/01/petition.html

On Twitter: +Istook @JamieQ13Fox  +KCLS @KCnews @KVIJohnCarlson @NCRL_Automation +Q13 FOX

Thursday, November 8, 2012

2,300 Petition to Stop School From Requiring Explicit Reading Material

Hundreds of parents in Guilford County are protesting a piece of literature that has been required reading for upperclassmen in some schools for at least 10 years, The Handmaid's Tale written by Margaret Atwood.  ....  Right now the schools offer an opt-out clause for students, but the parents want to take that step further.  And many agree.  They have gathered about 2,300 signatures from parents and students.  But they want to be clear, they are not asking that the book be prohibited in school, just excluded from the syllabus.  
Not prohibited, just removed from the syllabus.  Source:

Wow!  Over 2,300 signatures!  Of course from parents, but from students as well!


Watch Parents Speak Up for Appropriate Public School Reading Material

Watch parents speaking at a Guilford County Schools (NC) Board of Education meeting, and see how one parent gets a standing ovation:



See the Petition That Garnered Thousands of Signatures

Here's the petition that garnered thousands of signatures online and on paper (and I've reprinted it at bottom):

Many of the signatures are from concerned citizens, not parents of children who were actually assigned the book or in the school system.  However, school board policy for "addressing challenged educational resources," states, emphasis mine: "When there is a challenge to an educational resource expressed by students, employees, parents or guardians, or citizens of the school's attendance area, the following procedure shall be utilized."  So these thousands of petition signatures really are relevant to the educational issue facing that community.  Here is a news story prominently displaying the signed petitions:

Details About the Contents of The Handmade's Tale

What's in The Handmaid's Tale?  The book, while deemed appropriate for school children, could not be read on an evening news broadcast for fear of the loss of an FCC broadcast license:

"March Against "Banning Books"; Support for The Handmaid's Tale as Required Reading

I hear there may be a "march" against "book banning" at the school, so I informed many people the day before:
Dan Kleinman



BREAKING:  " " march  8 Nov re  's "The Handmaid's Tale"   
Some support the book being required reading in public school:

Sourced Information on Book Challenges You Won't Hear From the ALA

For the benefit of the Guilford County Schools Board of Education and the citizens of the school's attendance area, I provide some information, in no particular order, that will assist them in making a decision based on solid resources instead of emotional appeals opposing "censorship" or "book banning" as is likely to be displayed in the "march" against "book banning."  Agence France-Presse said I am "a clearing house for information about challenging books" and I've been advising communities for over a decade so please consider what I say.  Here's more about me, including a telephone number.  Reliable sources are provided, and where I cite to my own writing, the reliable sources are contained therein.  I have not read the The Handmaid's Tale so I will not comment on it, other than to say I support all authors and oppose true censorship.

Let' begin:
  1. No book has been banned in the USA for about half a century, Fanny Hill being the last: "Banned Book Favorites: Fanny Hill (Reprise)," by RasoirJ (George Clack), 3:17am, 25 August 2011.  This must be said because of all the false claims of book banning being bandied about, particularly by the media, e.g., "Parents Seek Ban on Certain Books," by Morgan Josey Glover, News & Record (Greensboro, NC), 1 November 2012.  Compare that title and its inherent spin and one-sided effect on the reader with another title that is truthful, namely, "Guilford Co. Parents Want Changes to Required Reading Lists," by Amanda McKenzieNews 14 Carolina, 2 November 2012.  Further, no parent ever bans a book from anywhere, except perhaps his or her own home.  Parents bring their concerns to the schools.  This is perfectly legitimate.  Schools even have the means set up to respond to such concerns.  If the book is indeed inappropriate and removed or some other action is taken such as removing it from a reading list, then the action is taken by the school, not by the parent.
  2. Sometimes the claim is made that every single person who ever questions the appropriateness of books for children in public schools is a censor or a book banner:  "The Parent Trap: ALA Uses Banned Books Week to Ridicule Patrons Complying with ALA Materials Reconsideration Policies," by Dan Kleinman, SafeLibraries, 29 September 2010.  Such claims are false and are intended to bully or intimidate people into silence.  If someone is making that claim, he or she is bullying both the parents and the community generally.  Even a self-described "progressive" librarian knows this is wrong when he says, "Regardless of what the school's decision turns out to be, regardless of its reasonableness or unreasonableness, and regardless of the objectivity or bias within the decision-making process in a specific case, all challenges to a book by a parent get counted as an attempt at book banning":  "Banned Books Week Propaganda Exposed by Progressive Librarian Rory Litwin; ALA Censors Out Criticism of Its Own Actions in a Manner Dishonest to the Core," by Dan KleinmanSafeLibraries, 1 September 2011.  Besides, as Dan Gerstein said, "The ... elites have convinced themselves that they are taking a stand against cultural tyranny. .... [T]he reality is that it is those who cry 'Censorship!' the loudest who are the ones trying to stifle speech and force their moral world-view on others."  See also, and you'll love the authors writing in the comments, "Kentucky School Superintendent Exposes False Cries of Censorship; Removes Educationally Unsuitable Books from Curriculum Despite Being on ALA's List for Reluctant Readers," by Dan KleinmanSafeLibraries, 30 November 2009.  
  3. The creator of the American Library Association's "Banned Books Week" said if a book does not meet its school's selection policy, "get it out of there":  "Marking 25 Years of Banned Books Week: An Interview with Judith Krug," by Judith Krug, 46 Curriculum Review 1, September 2006, p.12.
  4. Sometimes people who challenge inappropriate material in schools are made to look like they are the only ones who think this.  That is simply false.  2,300+ petition signatures show that is false.  In addition, a Harris Poll shows that is false.  Indeed the poll shows, "A majority of Americans say ... that books with explicit language should not be available to children in school libraries (62%)":  "Most Oppose Explicit Books in Public Schools Says Harris Poll," by Dan KleinmanSafeLibraries, 26 April 2011.
  5. Books that are "pervasively vulgar" may be removed from public schools immediately.  "[A]n unconstitutional motivation would not be demonstrated if it were shown that petitioners had decided to remove the books at issue because those books were pervasively vulgar":  Board of Education v. Pico, 457 US 853 (1982).  The American Library Association misleads communities on this case by advising on only a part of the truth, not the whole truth.  See, e.g.:  "School Media Specialist Passes Sexual Content Review to Students; Dee Venuto Says It Is Discrimination to Keep Children From Material Including Lengthy, Vivid Descriptions of a MĂ©nage a Trois," by Dan KleinmanSafeLibraries, 26 April 2011.
  6. There are those who say children should never be kept from anything whatsoever, that they must choose for themselves.  That may be their view, but the US Supreme Court says otherwise in a case that protected children from inappropriate material on the Internet in public libraries:  "The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree":  US v. American Library Association, 539 US 194 (2003).  
  7. In Evans-Marshall v. Board of Education of the Tipp City Exempted Village School District, the 6th Circuit Court ruled unanimously that "[t]eachers have no First Amendment free-speech protection for curricular decisions they make in the classroom": "Court Backs Local School Control in Evans-Marshall v Board of Education; ALA Loses Another Means to Propagandize Local Communities," by Dan KleinmanSafeLibraries, 22 October 2010.
  8. Inappropriate books for children is a concern for everyone, not just "conservatives" or "Christians."  Consider, for example, leading feminist, President Bill Clinton political consultant, and The Beauty Myth author Naomi Wolf who wrote in The New York Times that parents looking at reading for their children "might be in for a surprise."  For example, "sex saturates the 'Gossip Girl' books, by Cecily von Ziegesar, which are about 17- and 18-year-old private school girls in Manhattan.  This is not the frank sexual exploration found in a Judy Blume novel, but teenage sexuality via Juicy Couture, blasĂ© and entirely commodified":  "Young Adult Fiction: Wild Things," by Naomi Wolf, The New York Times, 12 March 2006.
  9. You know how you hear that this or that challenged book won awards or is highly recommended by reliable sources?  That is one excuse to promote allowing children access to inappropriate material.  At least one school principal is no longer falling for that excuse, saying, "You rely on a professional service such as Scholastic to review your books.  Everything I read gave glowing reviews and didn't go into the graphic sexual details of the book":  "School Excoriates Book Reviews that Fail to Disclose 'Graphic Sexual Details' in Books for Children; Lush by Natasha Friend is 'Wildly Inappropriate' for Certain Children," by Dan KleinmanSafeLibraries, 16 December 2010.  Also see, regarding the Wall Street Journal, "False Censorship Claims Exposed by WSJ Author Attacked for Exposing Truth About Young Adult Books; Meghan Cox Gurdon Decries Incomplete and Uninformative Book Reviews," by Dan KleinmanSafeLibraries, 8 June 2011.  And from another school in another state, see, "Humble ISD Now Screens Books, Guests Closer," by Bryan Kirk, Houston Chronicle, 11 September 2012.
  10. People view the American Library Association as being authoritative.  The organization has done a lot of good, but not all is good.  Its "Office for Intellectual Freedom" and "Freedom to Read Foundation" were created by a three year Illinois state ACLU leader.  She injected ACLU views into the ALA.  No longer would ALA librarians keep children from harm; suddenly librarians were to provide anything at all and it was up to parents to monitor their own children.  So, as these issues are being discussed, as the parents are being viewed as "censors," remember we are here because of an ACLU leader's effective control of the ALA, and the ALA thereafter changed the playing field and terminology.  Now the parents are wrong for challenging sexually inappropriate materials, and it's called "censorship" or "banning," instead of the schools being wrong for making such material available to children in the first place.  In reality, far from being authoritative, the ALA knowingly and intentionally misleads communities.  (A) In one case, its "Freedom to Read Foundation" quietly granted money to a person in West Bend, WI, leading the charge in seeking to ensure children retained access to sexually inappropriate material.  Only an official request for public records revealed the grant recipient bragging about the $1000 grant.  Neither the library nor the ALA made the grant public.  (B) In another case I recorded an author essentially admitting that the ALA faked its 2010 edition of its annual list of the top ten most challenged books.  (C) Recently the ALA openly suggested that public libraries should begin to consider collecting pornography.  (D) And the ALA joins with similar groups to intentionally mislead schools about challenged books.  (E) Prominent librarians point out that the ALA is the only organization promoting sexually inappropriate material for children.  (F) The author of the Children's Internet Protection Act wrote that the ALA misleads a third of American libraries into potentially harming children.  These are just the tip of the iceberg.  The ALA should not be viewed as authoritative.  If your school hears from the ALA, its argument likely contains similar false and misleading information.  I will help you see through this upon request, and I will use reliable sources.  
  11. I have a list of many articles on the topic of public school book selection and reading lists in the following story, which illustrates, by the way, that schools can react immediately to remove inappropriate material without being constrained to follow the American Library Association's suggested constraints: "School Removes Squirting Sperm Book After 8-Year-Old Complains To Her Mother," by Dan KleinmanSafeLibraries, 14 March 2011.

Opt Out Provisions Are Just an Easy Way Out

Let me add this about "opt out" provisions.  Opt out rules are really a means to allow the school boards to opt out of doing the right thing in the first place.  Children are supposed to have an equal education and governments bend over backwards to make that happen, correct?  Then why have "opt out" policies as they lead to unequal education.  Children who do opt out are necessarily left out of the classroom discussion of the material.  Schools shirk their responsibility to students when they intentionally allow students to take a path the teacher will not follow.

What is really being opted out is the requirement for fair and efficient education.  In every single case of opting out I've seen, the opt opt process is used to bully students and parents into not opting out because who wants the social stigma of standing out.  For example, most kids want to dress like the others for fear of standing out like a sore thumb.

I know the parents in Guilford County are asking for the ability to opt out.  Likely they do not realize the above.  It is similar to why Guilford County school policy says challenged books "shall not be restricted during the review process."  That policy comes from the ALA.  In reality, schools can toss that aside anytime they wish, as alluded to in the Pico case, just like was done in Phoenix, AZ, where the former head of the Arizona Library Association attempted to bully the school into keeping the sperm squirting book available to third graders while a review was underway.  You see, schools answer to the citizens, not to the ACLU/ALA.


Article and Petition Appear Below

Finally, here is that excellent article I have discussed above and the petition below that:


by Amanda McKenzie 
News 14 Carolina 
2 November 2012

GREENSBORO — Hundreds of parents in Guilford County are protesting a piece of literature that has been required reading for upperclassmen in some schools for at least 10 years, The Handmaid's Tale written by Margaret Atwood.

Lisa Reid was looking up her son's required reading list for Grimsley High School when she saw the list came with a warning.

"I had never seen a warning label on a public school reading list," said Reid.

It warns of mature content and after these parents read the book, they said it was not appropriate for teenagers.

"They need to be taught in a responsible manner that doesn't allow pornographic material to be read by our students," said parent Cathy Barnette said.

Right now the schools offer an opt-out clause for students, but the parents want to take that step further. And many agree. They have gathered about 2,300 signatures from parents and students. But they want to be clear, they are not asking that the book be prohibited in school, just excluded from the syllabus.

"The petition does not talk about banning books. It talks about setting standards that do not denigrate religion," said Reid.

Reid has brought her concerns and petition to the Guilford County School Board, and while no official response or action has been declared, some school board members are supportive of her efforts.

"I just wonder sometimes how books like this get on there," Paul Daniels said.

Daniels said he agrees that there should be standards that are in line with what the schools already promote in their values.

"We shouldn't be denigrating anybody's faith, not in required reading," said Daniels.

A controversial discussion that will likely continue.


by Lisa Reid
Greensboro, NC

Petition Letter

I just signed the following petition addressed to: Guilford County School Board.

Guilford County schools have assigned reading that specifically targets and denigrates Christianity. Two specific examples are The Handmaid’s Tale and Cat’s Cradle.

The American Federation of Teachers, the National School Board Association and 17 other national organizations have endorsed a document that specifies that 1) Religious conviction must be treated with fairness and respect. 2) Religion must be taught objectively and neutrally. 3) Schools educate about religion—they do not promote or denigrate religion.

The two books mentioned are in direct violation of these provisions.

http://www.sibbap.org/thehandmaidstale.htm

According to the courts, the school board as the public's elected representatives must set the standards in this area. Our school board has not been willing to intervene when religion is denigrated.

We, the undersigned, are concerned citizens who urge our leaders to engage in one of the very purposes for which it exists and make sure that our school assignments do not denigrate anyone’s religion and that in addition, such assignments promote rather than tear down traditional values.

[Your name]



Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Extensive Therapy For Library Thief; Crestview Public Library Not Responsible For Child's Losing His Mind Over Stolen Adult Material

The Crestview Public Library, Crestview, FL, is not responsible for the consequences of a child stealing an adult book from the library.  He "lost his mind" after reading the material and is now in a "home for extensive therapy."  See "Crestview Mom Targets Manga; Calls It 'Shocking,'" by Brian Hughes, Crestview News Bulletin, 2 July 2010.

I am very sorry that inappropriate material for children may have negatively affected the boy.  However, the library kept the book "in the general stacks, on a top shelf in a section with other graphic novels and comic books not geared toward young readers," as opposed to "the young adult section of the library [that] is oriented toward young teen readers and does not contain the adult themes of the book [the boy] took."  The mother admitted, "her son had removed the book unsupervised from the library's general stacks last summer and put it in his backpack."

So he stole the adult book a year ago and now needs "extensive therapy."  That is not the library's fault so far as I can see.  "We have policies and procedures in place to prevent underage children from accessing those materials."  Theft circumvents those policies and procedures and circumvents the library's liability.

I called the library director, Jean Lewis, and the governmental official, Council President Charles Baugh Jr., to offer my assistance, for what it's worth.  I am usually critical of libraries in situations where children are being harmed as a result of American Library Association policy, but this is not one of those cases.

Rather, this is an example of a citizen making false accusations about a library, at least as reported in the media.  The mother "had circulated a petition bearing 226 signatures of citizens protesting the availability of manga, ... which is ... Japanese animation.  However library said some patrons complained they were misled when they signed the petition.  'They told us [the mother] ... asked them to sign a petition protesting pornography in the library....'"  Let's be clear.  SafeLibraries supports actual instances of library policy or practices harming children, not manufactured claims of library malfeasance.

See also:

Okay, all my readers who expect me to oppose the library every time, why don't you comment on what I just said?

.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

4664 Successfully Petition for Filters on Public Library Computers

Public library board members like to say petitions are irrelevant, don't even bother. I was once told the public is "too unsophisticated" anyway.

Apparently, that's false. Please read "People Power Forces Porn Filter," by Nikkii Joyce, Sunshine Coast Daily, 18 August 2009.

Here are choice quotes, emphasis mine:

Community anger and a petition signed by 4664 people have forced the Sunshine Coast Regional Council to take action to install internet filters to block pornography at public libraries.

Mayor Bob Abbot has admitted the strength of the petition and an increasingly vocal public pushed the council into a corner.

....

That is what a petition is for, to give council an indication of community feel and when the petition first came round it gave us that feel so we kept on with the process,” he said.

“The problem we faced is making a decision without the information,” Mr Abbot said.

....

Councillor Anna Grosskreutz, who has supported the campaign from the start, said a closed forum held in the morning was brief and to the point.

“There are many things that are being eroded and people and families are losing the ability to choose what they want to see or what they want their children to see, so this is a wonderful result,” she said.

....
FYI, here are more library crime and filtering stories from Australia's Sunshine Coast.

Has your library said petitions or public input are practically irrelevant? Add a comment to let others know.

.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Faithful Christian Canadians Not Welcome On Library Boards

"Homosexual Groups Petition Library Board to Refuse Pro-Family Man,"
by
Alex Bush,
LifeSiteNews.com,
22 July 2009,
emphasis added.

EGANVILLE, Ontario, July 15, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com [LSN]) - Ken O'Day, a pro-family advocate who is applying to fill a vacancy on the Bonnechere Union Public Library Board in Eganville, Ontario, is being opposed by homosexualist groups for holding positions that "condemn gay and lesbian people in the area of social acceptance, legal rights, and education." The accusations come from a petition signed by 33 people, including the local provincial NDP candidate, which says that O'Day "has publicly stated that his personal agenda is to condemn members of the gay and lesbian community."

The woman who started the petition, who wishes to remain anonymous, commented to LSN, saying that O'Day's potential admittance to the board caused her to let the township know that "there is gay and lesbian community that would be very concerned."

"The reason they would be concerned is not only because of Mr. O'Day's fundamentalist Christian attitudes but that he has also made it very clear that he condemns the gay and lesbian lifestyle and he is quite aggressive about that viewpoint," she said.

"The board should represent a diversity of philosophies and attitudes," she commented, while admitting that the board generally consists of those who adhere to "inclusive liberal philosophies."

Furthermore, she said that she does not have a problem with expressing one's beliefs on the board as long one doesn't attempt to push an "aggressive agenda."

"It's more his strident aggressive tone than what he believes in," she said.

However, O'Day said that "her fears are based on conjecture."

"What the board is looking for is to have things run the way they have been," he commented, saying that at the meetings he has attended he has seen plenty of aggressive behavior coming from those who support the homosexual lifestyle.

"It's funny that the woman who started the petition accuses me of being aggressive when the present librarian and the chairwoman are very aggressive themselves," O'Day said.

"I think it's pretty standard now right across Canada since same sex 'marriage' was voted that you can bully any Christians, and in my case a Catholic Christian into not applying."

"What they're saying," he said, "is, if you're Catholic then don't apply for the job because you can't be a faithful Catholic and work on the board at the same time."

The petition was signed by the local provincial NDP candidate, Felicite Stairs, and the former federal Liberal Party president of the Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke Riding Association.

O'Day said that he applied for the position because he noticed that the library had added a pornographic movie, causing him to argue with the librarian and eventually being thrown out of her office. He also said that the librarian has filled the library with other feminist literature. He decided to take a stand and apply to fill the spot on the library board, saying that "If nobody is going to take a leadership role, then somebody has to."

The head librarian, Jennifer Coleman, refused to comment on the matter.

O'Day told LSN that four of the six members of the board agreed with what the librarian has done.

He also said that if he is prevented from joining the board because of his beliefs he would be willing to take legal action. "I'm a knowledgeable Christian as well as firm in my beliefs, I'm not going to waiver, I'm not going to give up. I'm going right through to the end on this," he said, "When they make this decision I want them to make a careful decision and weigh everything."

Contact[: ] North Algona/Wilberforce Council[.]

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. Reprinted with permission.

.

Saturday, April 25, 2009

"Pro Gay Lobby" Violates Free Speech Rights with Threats to Businesses Hosting Petition Drive for Child Safety in Public Library in West Bend, WI

In West Bend, WI, there is an effort underway to improve child safety in the public library. The public library itself has reacted by refusing to address the issues, thereby leaving children exposed to dangers which the community may otherwise block using legally available means. The local government has responding by refusing to reappoint library board members responsible for failing to act in the interest of the local citizenry. And a petition drive is underway to implement legally available means to protect children in the West Bend Community Memorial Library. See the petition Protect Youth from Sexually Explicit Materials in the Library, and petition drive announcements here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. Hear, hear! The petition drive is set to occur at various businesses in the surrounding area.

Along comes the "pro gay lobby," allegedly, according to one business owner, who is calling the businesses offering space for the petition drives. At least one business has backed out, according to that business owner, but he himself "will not be intimidated by the pro gay lobby":

After reviewing your site, YOU HAVE MY FULL CONFIDENCE; AND I WILL NOT BE INTIMIDATED BY THE PRO GAY LOBBY TRYING TO PROSELYTIZE CHILDREN!!!!!

....

If my small allowance for "democracy" in my parking lot "stirs the pot" with the intolerant gay lobby, so be it! I do not want my children exposed to this material while innocently looking for random library material!

.... I will be opening ... at 8 AM, 2 hours early, and any "troublemaking" elements interfering with your great exercise of democracy, via petition for redress of grievances, will be asked to leave.

I will gladly sign your petition in the A.M.

Source: "This BUSINESS OWNER is NOT AFRAID," by West Bend Citizen Advocate, WISSUP - WISCONSIN SPEAKS UP, 24 April 2009.

If the above is accurate, isn't is sad when those claiming a violation of freedom of speech occurs when children are legally restricted from inappropriate material use their own freedom of speech violations as a means to their ends?

Isn't it wrong when "intolerance," or anything for that matter, is used to suppress free speech?

Isn't it great when people are not intimidated by these kind of tactics?

One has to wonder what is so bad about legal means to keep children from inappropriate material that people have to violate the free speech rights of others to suppress citizens from hearing different viewpoints so as to decide for themselves what's right and what's wrong.

Think about this. Without knowing what an issue is about at all, I would side with those being denied their freedom of speech by a vocal minority using threats and intimidation to shut them up. That in itself indicates to me the intimidators know they are wrong and have no legitimate argument to support what they seek.

Indeed, in this West Bend controversy or anywhere, there is no legitimate argument to support ignoring legal means to protect children from inappropriate material in the public library. None. And refusing to even consider the question is even worse. Forcibly shutting people up may even be criminal. Without knowing it, the efforts to suppress the free speech rights of West Bend and area citizens will only result in increasing support for their efforts to protect children in the public library.

See "This BUSINESS OWNER is NOT AFRAID," by West Bend Citizen Advocate, WISSUP - WISCONSIN SPEAKS UP, 24 April 2009.

[ADDED COMMENT 25 APRIL 2009:] Apparently, the opponents of free speech do believe in free inappropriate speech for children: "Opposers drove through Hobby Lobby parking lot and screamed obscenities at us and the children who were volunteering today. Some of the words were appalling..... (but pretty sure they could be found in many, if not most, of the books we are protesting). No child should be harassed in that manner. No adult should either, for that matter. They flipped us the middle finger." See "Intimidation Tactics Fail on Productive Day for Signature Drive.....," by West Bend Citizen Advocate, WISSUP - WISCONSIN SPEAKS UP, 25 April 2009. Just see the first comment below for more of this.

.