Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Monday, June 08, 2009

After fighting for the removal of the book Baby Be-Bop from a West Bend, Wisc., library, the Christian Civil Liberties Union and three other plaintiffs have sued over the book, seeking "the right to publicly burn or destroy by another means" the book and asking for $120,000 in damages because they were exposed to it in a library display.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

Zarathustra

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Dear God:
Please hold your Rapture soon-we really NEED to get rid of these fundie creeps.

Thank You In Advance
America

I don't know how the laws work in Milwaukeebut I hope these fundie lunatics get stuck paying the city and the library's legal fees and land up bankrupt.

"Fundie creeps..."

Yes, they can be annoying. But they aren't usually the ones that want to ban "Tom Sawyer" and "Huckleberry Finn". Any ideas about what to do with both flavors of book-burners?

Christian Civil Liberties Union, ha! Church and state, assholes.

Libs and atheists love to push pornography to children in the name of free speech. Libs are sick and liberalism is a mental disorder which must be cured by any means necessary.

liberalism is a mental disorder which must be cured by any means necessary.
....#5 | Posted by fwthom

.......the Taliban cure liberalism with a moderate dose of execution........

.......it's good to see you lining up with your kindred spirits.......

As a Christian and a Conservative I have to say that this is just silly. But it's no different than the ACLU planting some family in rural Mississippi so they can have nexus to sue the local school system.

I decide what my kids read and don't read. And the truth is they can hear all those bad words and derogatory comments by watch HBO for an hour.

When they do encounter something inappropriate they always ask for an explanation. And they get one that is clear and honest.


Yes, but Rogers does dearly love these "stupid Christian" threads.

Any book worth burning is worth reading.

This isn't quite as simple as the poster purports.. the word "Public" in front of the word library means that the "public" (and that includes everyone), has a say in what is and isn't in a library supported by public funding.

It's always been a difficult task to find the path of reason. Those that say the public has no say whatsoever in what's in a library are not voices of reason; and neither are the ones that want, for instance, the writings of Mark Twain banned for containing the word "nigger" even though Twain clearly used it as an attack on the cultural racism of his day. Intelligent people should read intelligently.

No reasonable person wants pornography in a public library, and parents should have a reasonable expectation that books labeled as being for young readers should be more restrained than those for adults. And not every book has the "right" to be in a public library. The "public" can decide that.

It just seems to me that a reasoned discourse and compromise could be reached in these matters. Library boards should not be disdainful of the public, and interest groups should not demand the right to be the sole arbiter of what is and isn't permissible. And lawyering up, rarely results in the public's best interests being served.

"Libs and atheists love to push pornography to children in the name of free speech. Libs are sick and liberalism is a mental disorder which must be cured by any means necessary."

Feel free to drop by and try to "cure" me.

Your name calling is tedious.

Yes, but Rogers does dearly love these "stupid Christian" threads.

They've filed suit to burn a book, Corky. That's a free speech story.

#5 | Posted by fwthom

Did you check out what the book in question was about? It's about a gay kid who gets the shit kicked out of him for being gay, passes out and then hallucinates about his ancestors telling him their love stories. When he comes to he realizes the hallucinations were a result of his grandma telling him stories about his family.

The book isn't pornography. It has a gay kid being supported and loved by his family which is in no way an offensive concept. Unless you're deluded.

from this summarization:

"In Baby Be-Bop, sixteen-year-old Dirk McDonald details his difficulties in coming to terms with his homosexuality. Readers first meet Dirk in the novel Weetzie Bat, when he and his lover, Duck, become central cogs in Weetzie's eccentric and loving extended family. In Baby Be-Bop, Block goes back to explore Dirk's childhood and early adolescence before he meets both Weetzie and Duck. As the novel opens, Dirk's idyllic childhood, which he spends living with his grandmother Fifi, ends when he enters adolescence and recognizes homosexual feelings. As Dirk realizes that his..."

it's just another indoctrination tactic for our youth. nothing to see here.

burn it? no. move it to the adult section? probably.


OK, but I notice you don't deny what I said, lol.

I go along with Ray Bradbury on this...

imagecache.allposters.com

Religious Fundamentalism are two very evil words when put together. In my experience, Fundamentalists typically have very little to do with the actual religions they claim to follow. It doesn't matter whether they are Muslim, Jewish, Christian or any other religion. These are brainwashed fanatics typically following power crazed firebrands. There is nothing "Christian" about what these people are doing. They miss the entire point and only know their cleric's interpretation and hate. They are just as dangerous here as anywhere else, if you give them too much power the next thing you know they will be stoning the guilty, forcing people to where the scarlet letter (or worse) and having the Salem Witch trials all over again.

Why do we keep caving in to vocal minorities?

OK, but I notice you don't deny what I said, lol.

Yes, I did. I chose the story because of the book-burning angle. The accusation you've been making lately that I seek out "stupid Christian" stories is wrong. If you feel defensive about the actions that some Christians take, don't project that onto me.

Why do we keep caving in to vocal minorities?

#16 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2009-06-08 10:09 AM | Reply

Like Martin Luther King Jr.?

Wrong, just wrong.


Very conservative people think that their culture is being desensitized to all sorts of behaviours of which they don't approve in media from books to movies to TV.

And all of us draw the line somewhere as to what we personally think is suitable for public display and what is sometimes grudgingly acceptable under the rule of law.

But "burning books" seems a little antiquated. I'm sure there are some books that libraries will not put on shelves because they are not suitable for public display.

Whether this book is one of them, and it doesn't appear so to me, is a question for debate and reconciliation under laws that govern such things.

"The accusation you've been making lately that I seek out "stupid Christian" stories is wrong."

Actually, you post three or four 'stupid Christian' threads each week. You may not be aware of it, but it is obvious that you have a crank on for them.

Now, in this particular case, go buy the book and burn it yourself. If you buy a dozen, or a hundred, the bookstore will give you a huge discount.


Wrong, just wrong.

#19 | Posted by chickenrancher at 2009-06-08 10:19 AM | Reply | Flag

But that's what we've come daily to expect from you so not to worry.

****The accusation you've been making lately that I seek out "stupid Christian" stories.....*****

.........being surrounded by stupid Christians as we are.........

........there is no need to "seek out" stupid Christian stories........they are part of the fabric of life in America.......

.......just as book-burning / music-banning / barber-hating Taliban are part of the landscape of other countries........

- If you feel defensive

Hmmmm, projection? You certainly sound defensive.

Most of the "stupid Christian" stuff is truly stupid stuff done by Fundies or modern pop Christianity, which I have never defended, but have berated as much as any atheist here.

It's just that it is so often low-hanging fruit that is easy bashing for anyone who feels so inclined, and there is almost a daily forum for that here. But then, the fundies and such do provide the material.

You know I'm sweet on you, so I'll take your word for the free speech angle.

"Any book worth burning is worth reading"

Worth repeating!

"Church and state, assholes."

The Church needs to stay out the States "Business" and the State needs to stay out the Churches "Business". Simple as that.


Now as to these wack-o-loons wanting to burn books; If they pay for them, then they can do what ever they want with them. Period. It may be offensive, stupid and childish, but it is their right of Free Expression to be Offensive, stupid and childish. They DO NOT however have the power or authority to arbitrarily decide what books are ALLOWED in a PUBLIC library. Regardless of what NMG No, thinks. Libraries are to be the repositories of ALL written/published works. And yes, this includes things that ALOT of people would/do/will find "offensive". Just because a majority find something offensive does not mean thay can Remove access to it from the Minority which has no problem with it.THe First Amendment is NOT to protect accepted speech or expression, it is to protect ALL speech and expression(out side of "fighting words") including the most disgusting and possibly offensive.

Feel free to drop by and try to "cure" me.


Your name calling is tedious.

#11 | Posted by Goose at 2009-06-08 09:54 AM | Reply | Flag: Trolling the net for ghey sex

#11 | Posted by Goose at 2009-06-08 09:54 AM | Reply | Flag: Trolling the net for ghey sex

#26 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-06-08 10:34 AM | Reply | Flag: And finding it

Well played.

Actually, you post three or four 'stupid Christian' threads each week.

Out of how many stupid things Christians do each week in this country? I do not have an axe to grind against Christians in general.

When stupid ones make news with moves like this "we demand to burn a book" suit and calling themselves the Christian Civil Liberties Union, I'm happy to pass that along. They've formed a civil liberties group to deny others the right to read a book in a public library! How do these geniuses get themselves dressed every morning?

Vern,
He posts tons of anti-Israel and "those evil Jews" stories as well every week. Maybe, just maybe, Rcade is posting the stories he knows will generate debate rather than exposing some deep seated anti-whatever point of view.

Well then let's get some stories about the lazy minorities on the front page...

Well then let's get some stories about the lazy minorities on the front page...


I said "will generate debate," we would all agree on those....


JK, relax left-leaning DR people....just a joke.


Well then let's get some stories about the lazy minorities on the front page...

#31 | Posted by 101Chairborne

www.lutins.org

How do these geniuses get themselves dressed every morning?
........#29 | Posted by rcade

.......same way that Batman and Robin managed to change during their pole slide to the Bat-cave.....

.......they help each other........

-Well then let's get some stories about the lazy minorities on the front page...

I wish I had the video to show you from the Brian Williams White House tour last week that had Michelle Obama reading a letter from a little black girl who talked about how it was hard for her and her friends at school knowing that many people looked at them as, "soon to be criminals and dopers", just because of their color and not because of the content of their character.

Minorities still have a hard enough time in this country without the propagation of racial slurs.

It ain't funny, Jones.

"Libs and atheists love to push pornography to children in the name of free speech. Libs are sick and liberalism is a mental disorder which must be cured by any means necessary."

This from Ugly Thommy, who would define porn (he knows it when he sees it) and apparently endorses the assassinations of librarians as well as physicians.

Even Ngo and Vern seem to favor "compromises," apparently suggesting that free speech and library content be subject to the vote of folks who deem "My Pet Goat" to be literature.

And don't forget the Ugliest Of Them All, the Pretend Paratrooper, somehow equating the Stupid Christians with racial minorities. Methinks Stupid Christians make their own news. herm

Michelle Obama reading a letter from a little black girl....


#35 | Posted by Corky at 2009-06-08 11:09 AM | Reply


Did it say "This is a robbery. Give me all of the small unmarked bills, and no dye packs"?

re: "Libs and atheists love to push pornography to children in the name of free speech. Libs are sick and liberalism is a mental disorder which must be cured by any means necessary."

Sounds like the Taliban, and the motherfuckers who murdered 3000+ infidels on 9/11 (by any means necessary).

101-
Regardless, the torture couldn't have been that bad. He lived for 54 years afterward.

#2 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-05-08 02:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

www.drudge.com

Sterotypes only have the power that YOU give them by LETTING yourself be offended by a stupid ignorant individual. I deal with sterotyping everyday from people. I just laugh it of as another ignorant asshole and dont let my day be ruined by it. I refuse to a be a emotional and mental midget by letting some knuckledraggers 3rd grade opinion have any influence in my life.


101chairborne-
I'm not new, but I'm not "boyd". But please continue. It's fun!

Posted by Cooper at 2007-09-25 04:02 PM | Reply

101-
Oh, I once posted as "Boyd", what I have never done is downplay the torture of a POW in order to excuse the motherfucker I voted for in the last election:

Regardless, the torture couldn't have been that bad. He lived for 54 years afterward.

#2 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-05-08 02:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

www.drudge.com

You're hooked.

www.drudge.com

Regardless, the torture couldn't have been that bad. He lived for 54 years afterward.

#2 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-05-08 02:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

re: "Libs and atheists love to push pornography to children in the name of free speech. Libs are sick and liberalism is a mental disorder which must be cured by any means necessary."

Possibly one of those right wing terrorists we have been hearing about? Wonder if Fugly Thom is on the Terrorist Watch List. "Any means necessary" sounds like code words for "justifiable homicide".

Fahrenheit 451

it's just another indoctrination tactic for our youth. nothing to see here.

burn it? no. move it to the adult section? probably.

#14 | Posted by nanc

Nanc probably also believes that all HARRY POTTER books are teaching (indoctrinating) our children in the fine art of witchcraft.

G-d Loves the Stupid...He Made so Many.

Goody, goody! I'm all for it. Burn, baby, burn!

I think that every American should be able to submit a list of five books to be banned from all public libraries and from sale in book stores. Not only will the pyres of burning books save us oil and gas heating us during the winter, but we could relegate the Library of Congress to a small shelf in a back-room closet and still have room on the shelf for a few knick-knacks. And think of how we can shorten the school day - or just plain do away with it.

And, just in case nobody else names them, I'm going to submit the Old Testament, the New Testament, Webster's Dictionary, Winnie the Pooh, and Grimm's Fairy Tales. After all, they are all filled either with obscene violence or dirty words (we all know what Pooh is a euphemism for, don't we, boys and girls).

Geez, every time they open their mouths, our Christian fundamentalists sound more and more like the Taliban. I guess fundamentalism is a form of mental derangement no matter what religion or other belief system fosters it.

Not only will the pyres of burning books save us oil and gas heating us during the winter


Think of all the trees we could save by banning books all together! Think of all the suffering we could alleviate by reducing knowledge...nothing hurts more than knowing someone else has something you don't!

If my grandkids brought that gay porno book home I would burn it and then bitch slap the librarian. They don't have a right to push this stuff to kids.

Interesting debate here actually. From the article: Baby Be-Bop contains the "n" word and derogatory sexual and political epithets that can incite violence and "put one's life in possible jeopardy, adults and children alike."

We have banned books from schools before based on "the "n" word and derogatory sexual and political epithets," so there is precedent, but I am not sure about Public Libraries. Most of the lawsuit has no grounds (damages and such), but there may be some cause to remove the book possible. I honestly cannot say for certain having not read or even heard of the book prior to this story.

FWTHOM-
How are your kids coming along on the "bitch slap the librarian" class? (Got to teach 'em 'values'!)

I heard that the book they want to burn is
"The Idiot's Guide to Book Burning".

I find it ironic that MPL has to hear about banning this book, yet when I attended middle school in nowheresville WI, our English teacher had just about every Judy Blume book every written. This was back in 1988.

She had made "Are you there God, it's me Margaret" part of the required curriculum, and also the Fudge series. She also had the holy grail of banned books, "Forever", as part of her collection of books you could check out.

As I recall, she assigned books that you might not agree with to help you form your own opinion about things. She didn't agree with certain things that were in books, and she let us know it. But she let people read and form their own opinion.

I think that this had a lasting effect on me of not being afraid to find out what a controversy was about for myself, and to form my own opinions. I've read Mein Kampf and the Qu'ran. I watched Brokeback Mountain. All of it was to find out what the actual fuss was about. Most of time it was over nothing. Brokeback Mountain is a chick flick with dudes in it.

I find it highly ironic that a middle-class, fairly conservative, highly midwestern-Lutheran english teacher may have better success with keeping controversial material available than the library of the largest city in my state will.

Everyone here should go pick up a copy of "Free Speech for Me But Not for Thee: How the American Left and Right Relentlessly Censor Each Other" By a Mr. Nat Hentoff. AWSOME book.

This is just the latest in the kind of lame ass bullshit we will have to put up with from the Party of Fail.

The losers are coming to grips with their new permanent status as the shit-eating-dogs of modern politics.

Sniveling, back biting and obstruction are the only actions the Rtards have left. They have no power except to annoy.

Just like AFKABIBBL2, the Republican Party has lost its mind and can only babble bullshit.

Gee, that second amendment shore 'nuff is impotent.
Whut's the first one agin?

Axe, your stament sound EXACTLY like a republican post form say, 2 summers ago. Not saying that I dont agree with you, just it comes off as " The pot calling the Kettle black".

Milwaukee-area citizen Robert C. Braun of the Christian Civil Liberties Union (CCLU) distributed at the meeting copies of a claim for damages he and three other plaintiffs filed April 28 with the city; the complainants seek the right to publicly burn or destroy by another means the library's copy of Baby Be-Bop. The claim also demands $120,000 in compensatory damages ($30,000 per plaintiff) for being exposed to the book in a library display, and the resignation of West Bend Mayor Kristine Deiss for "allow[ing] this book to be viewed by the public."



What the fuck is a 'Christian Civil Liberty'?? No such thing in the eyes of the law.

Also, they want money for having known a book was in the library? These fundamentalist christian extremists sure do seem to be a tender bunch of sniveling bitches.

Typical extreme right-wing mentality of feeling they are superior and therefore should be able to tell you what you can watch and what you can read.........all while calling anyone left of them 'commies' and 'un-American'.

"Typical extreme right-wing mentality of feeling they are superior and therefore should be able to tell you what you can watch and what you can read.........all while calling anyone left of them 'commies' and 'un-American'."

I 100% agree. But i would add, the same can be said of extreme left-wing mentality....and calling those with whom they are in dispute "facist, racist, ect.." Left or Right, lets face it, Party over Country from what have observed.

We MUST break this FALSE right-left Paridigm. if The United States of America is going to survive.

"A Mr." Nat Hentoff is a Village Voice legal columnist with amazing editorial latitude. Progressive, human-oriented on most issues, he also seems to be a dyed-in-the-wool fetal rights advocate. If Nat thinks left and right try to censor each other and are equally to blame in other matters, Nat tries too hard to play the neutered "journalist." herm

I'm sorry Herm but i dont find anything "Neutered" about Nat Hentoff. unless by Neutered you mean holds everyone to the same standard they would hold anyone selse to.

selse. what a word. jeezus.

Thinking further about the notion that the left tries to censor the right:

The bogus paratrooper and the right-wing Donald, if they indeed are two people, represent the worst spawns yet of the American system, but I wouldn't dream of trying to muffle them.

Billy El Cid makes it personal. His prerogative, Go for it, Cidney. Babble on, Afka. Even when distracted from that socialist library computer by a pair of capitalist boobs.

"Johnson" buries his peculiar brand of hatred in correct spelling and syntax and a plethora of college level words. Try to put a lid on him? Wouldn't dream of it.

TakeIt, Nancy and Kirk attempt to rationalize their headlong rush into the 14th century by quoting scripture and claiming divine endorsement. Proseletyzing on a public internet? Have at it.

We "libs" dislike having bullshit, religious or otherwise, crammed down out throats at our own expense, but I know of no instance in which we've tried to silence anyone. herm

Herm your joking right?

Look up Mary Cate Carroll at Mary Washington College. The Censoring of Art by a Non-"right winger"

Profesor Rabin of Stanford U.

I could come up with some more. These are just 2 of the top. Give me a moment to get my 1st Amendment folder.....

"If my grandkids brought that gay porno book home I would burn it and then bitch slap the librarian. They don't have a right to push this stuff to kids."

Methinks this poster does not know what a public library is.

Yep, pushers. They're all pushers.

Oh, and teachers have a homosexualist, socialist agenda too.

Look out! Them kids is gonna get brainywashed!

The Right and the Left are equally indignant of ANY who break form prescribed Orthodoxy.

Form needs to be *from their*

Billy El Cid makes it personal. His prerogative, Go for it, Cidney. - HARM

What the hell are you talking about. I haven't even posted on this thread.

Libs not try to silence anyone - what a fucking joke that is. I hope you can be at least honest with yourself. Wanna go a few rounds on freedom of speech as it relates to religous discussions? Thought not.

Libs not try to silence anyone - what a fucking joke that is. I hope you can be at least honest with yourself.


Can you be honest enough to admit that either side tries to silence their critics or do you want to pretend it is just a left or just a right thing?

"Libs and atheists love to push pornography to children in the name of free speech."

Dude, if you're jerkin your little gerkin to this book that is your problem but that doesn't make it porn.

Oh, and I say this: If the group in question wants to burn the book, they should go buy some copies and light up. In the town square if they can get the appropriate permits. But under what possible statute or law could they possibly have the right to take public property and set it on fire? If they don't like the results of an election, will they sue to light the polling place on fire? (I know, far from perfect analogy.)

"Libs not try to silence anyone - what a fucking joke that is. I hope you can be at least honest with yourself. Wanna go a few rounds on freedom of speech as it relates to religous discussions? Thought not."

Really, liberals stifle religious _discussion_? Really? (Oh, I think I know what you mean; I just bet we disagree on what "discussion" means.)

I 100% agree. But i would add, the same can be said of extreme left-wing mentality....and calling those with whom they are in dispute "facist, racist, ect.." Left or Right, lets face it, Party over Country from what have observed.

#60 | Posted by GotTruth at 2009-06-08 01:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

I definitely agree with that statement.

"If the group in question wants to burn the book, they should go buy some copies and light up"


My sentiments exactly.

"Can you be honest enough to admit that either side tries to silence their critics or do you want to pretend it is just a left or just a right thing?"

Well ... no! The progressive side tries to silence NO critics. herm

What the fuck is a 'Christian Civil Liberty'??
.....#59 | Posted by COMMONSENSE

.....same thing as the call for anti-abortion laws by people who can't get pregnant......

Well ... no! The progressive side tries to silence NO critics. herm

#77 | Posted by herm at 2009-06-08 02:26 PM | Reply | Flag: Funny as hell I'm quite the commodian flag


This jsut for Herm since we all know that ONLY the right wing tryis to Ban/Silence speech they dont like/agree with!
Mark Belling was prevented from speaking at The University of Wisconsin due to threats of violence.
US Army Chief of Staff Gen. William Westmoreland in 72 at Yale was prevented from speaking @ the Law Aditorium(i'm sure it was the College Republicans that did this!)
I'm so sure that all the People who ever wanted Huck Finn banned vote Republican, LOL.
What about the MinuteMen and Haaarvard(or was it Yale?) stage was stormed and his speech was effectivly "banned" from being heard by others. make no mistake ANY silencing of a opinion is CENSORSHIP.
There is NO legitimacy to "Hecklers Veto". It's a tactic used by those who cannot come up with a well thought-out, planned, consistant and defendable position to counter speech they do not like.

Go,
You don't have to go that far back even....Mr "Don't Taze Me Bro" was questioning Kerry if I remember correctly.

The silence of the opposition is not the way to prove your point is the better. Debate is. Anyone who would rather "Shout Down" a opposing view is very weak in their argument to begin with.

I just like throwing my 2cents out there for what it worth. Work is fairly boring just before shift change!

If they want this burned, how would they feel If I wiped my ass with the bible and burned a stack of bibles?


If they want this burned, how would they feel If I wiped my ass with the bible and burned a stack of bibles?

#84 | Posted by rastaninja at 2009-06-08 03:46 PM


None too happy would be my guess.

The bible should have a wide variety of information. Some things I like and some I don't. I just don't understand why children shouldn't learn about homosexuality. Learning bout gays does not make you gay. What it will make you learn is that gays are just like you except they have a different sexual preference. If you teach children young they will be less likely to discriminate and have feelings of ill will toward gays.

#79 | Posted by ELCIDCE90 at 2009-06-08 02:41 PM | Reply | Flag

How about an making a point instead of just another moronic post for once? Give it a shot.


If they want this burned, how would they feel If I wiped my ass with the bible and burned a stack of bibles?

#84 | Posted by rastaninja


I'd give you the bible and then invite my friends over to drink beer and watch.

Perhaps we could get you shove the bible up your ass and hop up and down on one leg while singing your favorite "Queen" song.


#79 | Posted by ELCIDCE90 at 2009-06-08 02:41 PM | Reply | Flag


How about an making a point instead of just another moronic post for once? Give it a shot.

#87 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2009-06-08 03:53 PM | Reply | Flag: Is entirely too ignorant or one-sided in criticism of the nauseatingly overused altering the "flag" to make a "point" tactic

"If my grandkids brought that gay porno book home I would burn it and then bitch slap the librarian. They don't have a right to push this stuff to kids."

FWTHOM-

Your comments seem to indicate that you believe that a) it is possible for a librarian to teach your grandchildren to be homosexual by encouraging them to check out and read a book, and b) that librarians want to make your grandchildren into homosexuals.

You feel homosexuality is wrong, but you regularly experience sexual feelings for other members of your gender. You believe that this daily suffering/temptation is everyone's experience and that the goal of 'liberals' is to cultivate latent homosexual feelings in people. You're gay. It makes you angry because you think it's wrong. It also makes you angry when other people discuss homosexuality as something that is acceptable because you have worked so hard and unsuccessfully to destroy that part of yourself. But, I assure you that your grandchildren are not at risk of being indoctrinated in homosexuality through books. If your grandchildren are heterosexual, then they will not have the same sexual urges that you do, no matter how much gay 'porn' they read. If your grandchildren are homosexual, then it is more likely that they will be indoctrinated by you with the same self-loathing that you apply to yourself. ;-)

"Christianity has a built-in defense system:

anything that questions a belief, no matter how logical the argument is, is the work of Satan by the very fact that it makes you question a belief.

It's a very interesting defense mechanism and the only way to get by it -- and believe me, I was raised Southern Baptist -- is to take massive amounts of mushrooms, sit in a field, and just go, "Show me."

anything that questions a belief, no matter how logical the argument is, is the work of Satan by the very fact that it makes you question a belief.

The parallels between religion and global warming are frightenly similar.

"#11 | Posted by Goose at 2009-06-08 09:54 AM | Reply | Flag: Trolling the net for ghey sex"

Don't need to post one-oh-none, I could just pm you for that.

"Wanna go a few rounds on freedom of speech as it relates to religous discussions? "

Well, yeah! I defend to the death your right to utter any religious (with an i) junk you like. You do NOT have the right to inflict it on me for my tax buck, or on my grandchildren in their classrooms. Start there. Your turn. herm

Censoring library books is a cynical political act, and there is really no concern for the books from the Xtians as they try to control our lives. They have lost in national politics, they have been made fools in the media, and now they are scared and desperate.

As soon as your children are old enough to read a book without damaging it, get them an unrestricted library card. Besides, keeping a lid on what your kids read is not unlike hiding the boiling point for water. Sooner or later they will find out how things work.

.. Intelligent people should read intelligently. ..
#10 | Posted by nmg_no at 2009-06-08 09:49 AM

Truth.

"You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think."

Any ideas about what to do with both flavors of book-burners?

Burn them.

#95 | Posted by john47

RIGHT ON!

NW!

Baby Be-bop and the early years of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Yes, lets glorify licentiousness and vile things...cuz it's a baby you knowo, and therefore innocent.

I wonder if there will be a sequal? Baby bop on sister. Bobby's look back at childhood and what it was like growing up with pedophile inclinations.

I'm sure it will be a best seller in a few years. But I wonder if the GLBT group will embrace the book or want to burn it....like those foul Christians do?

#36 | Posted by herm at 2009-06-08 11:25 AM

This from Ugly Thommy, who ... apparently endorses the assassinations of librarians ...

Er, hallucinating again, herm?

Could you link to that statement? Or is it just another figment of your hyperactive imagination?

"You don't have to go that far back even....Mr "Don't Taze Me Bro" was questioning Kerry if I remember correctly."

Odd. I don't remember reading anything about Kerry silencing the guy. The guards did it. And he was being an ass. I'm fairly convinced the whole thing was a setup. Read up on the guy...

This book was for "Grade 10 up?"

I'm willing to bet the farm that the "work" is a mediocrity, the product of some low tier writer.

Possibly this can elicit some commentary from lefties, who want to ban reat talents such as some works of Mark Twain for being written in the vernacular and referring to "Nigger Jim." These attempts to bowdlerize our literature are unfortunate. Banning a "book" that is certainly not literature but a journey into exploration of the perverse, is probably ill-advised. If it is controversial, I wouldn't want it removed from the library. But I wouldn't want to circumvent parental concurrence that the book should be made available to his child. That should be a decision of the parent and not the library. The library should be allowed to carry the book for general circulation. But making the book available to particular children should be subject to the child obtaining parental permission to access the book.

How do you lefties stand on banning books generally? Do you support leftist agitators and racial agitators who favor banning for example, certain works of Mark Twain? Will you denounce such bans? Will you denounce such bans say from black neighborhood libraries because the language might offend sensitive minority children, who it seems are from the perspective of the Twain book banners, insulated from hearing such words in their neighborhoods? Are you consistent in support of access to materials?

Seems to me that "liberalism is a mental disorder which must be cured by any means necessary" is the same rationale for librarians as this Roeder nut used to justify murdering the physician. herm

Everything else said, I'm always amused by the outrageous demands made for monetary compensation for offended delicate sensibilities. These claims are ludicrous, but they are typical.

I know some people who were at an upscale resort when a couple of maids began making the rounds and intruded on them by knocking on the door and asking if they could enter and exchange the phone book in the room for a newer phone book. they were so distressed that they called the Manager to complain concerning the intrusion. The Manager understood and bought them a dinner that cost some $200 at a nearby restaurant to atone for this egregious display. Of course, the books should have been changed between occupancy, but the value of the disturbance seems a bit exaggerated.

But compared to $30,000 for viewing a display, it seems quite reasonable. What were the effects on the plaintiffs of viewing the display? Did they become nocturnally and diurnally incontinent and enuretic? What distress have they experienced? Loss of sleep? Loss of consortium? What?

The laaaawd thinks you have your bible, why would you be at the library anyways? It's not like those devout Christians would read anything scientific, or dirty fabio covered books, or pagan vampire stories, or wizard stories.

No. Of course not.

"They (Christians) have lost in national politics...."

Really? I thought my guy won.

#103 | Posted by herm at 2009-06-08 07:20 PM

Seems to me that "liberalism is a mental disorder which must be cured by any means necessary" is the same rationale for librarians as this Roeder nut used to justify murdering the physician. herm

Really herm, you never cease to amaze me with your flights of fancy and the things you equate.

You don't seem to have a clue as to how other people's minds work, herm. Putting a book on display and wanton destruction of the lives of innocents for you is on the same plane. How can anyone explain the difference which seems so basic and obvious. The elimination of Tiller the Killer was not part of a race for the cure.

herm, "curing" a mental disorder does not require elimination of the person suffering from the malaise. Tiller was a beast who butchered babies. Cure of his disorder, whatever malevolent forces impelled him to do his base work, was not the issue. The protection of innocent lives from harm is what motivated the removal of Tiller the Killer.

'(T)he value of the disturbance seems a bit exaggerated"?

If maids barged in to "change the phone book" back in the days I went to hotels for that sort of thing, a $200 dinner wouldn't begin to cover my annoyance. Maybe Johnson's needs are cheaper. herm

How do these defenders of literary display and availability feel about the leftists and race hustlers securing the ban of some of Mark Twain's books. Will you stand up and be counted in opposition to that? You haven't to date, have you?

For what it's worth, I urged the local NAACP not to try to ban Huck Finn. But even a troglodyte like Johnson must admit Mark Twain was of a different era (Johnson's era?) reflecting different values. herm

Horace you are wrong

#108 | Posted by herm at 2009-06-08 07:42 PM

Maybe Johnson's needs are cheaper. herm

Probably so herm. I'm a non-confrontational live and let live type of guy, who lives with quite a bit of equanimity. I don't escalate minor inconveniences to conflicts or try to exploit them to my advantage.

I suppose it's like the "Princess and the Pea." The princess was so sensitive that she was disturbed by the protrusion of the pea, felt through a number of mattresses. You high-spirited folks need plodders such as me to do the heavy lifting that you elegant folk can't accommodate.

We'll see how the sensitives survive the Obama inflation and attendant social unrest and disruption. Those of us who can "get along" and survive the slings and arrows of adverse fortune without entering into a warp mode hyper response may find our lack of extremely delicate sensibilities and sensitivities redounds to our advantage in unsettled times. We'll see.

The kids, broadly defined, are trading an interesting secular culture among themselves. There isn't much to it, resting on the twin pillars of intoxication and exploitative and slovenly sex, but many seem to like it.

Already did provide my kids with unrestricted library cards. That's not where the shit's coming from, though. And I'm prety sure it can't be better than Christianity.

"The protection of innocent lives from harm is what motivated the removal of Tiller the Killer."

Let's hang that on the wall. We used the same idea to rationalize My Lai. Had to save the village, so we burned it down." herm

And let Johnson live by "The Princess And The Pea." With equanimity. We shall hope that he doesn't pick up his trusty .45 and assassinate a physician or politician to get even. herm

Burn the bible!

Really? I thought my guy won.

#106 | Posted by Zed

Then we can blame Christians for Obama's failures.

Did the NAACP succeed in securing the ban it sought, herm? If so, why should it be a favored censor? The Catholic Church used to be the Censor Librorum that patrolled library collections for "improper" materials. The left opposed this. The left has been strangely still in responding to censorship by the NAACP.

The so-called "rights" of access seem to diminish when preferred groups are licensed by their claims of victimhood to diminish the freedoms and rights of others in the community. This has become institutionalized with use of euphemistic language hiding the insidious effect of catering to the increasingly aggressive demands of groups for whom no boundary has been established. So like children they keep pushing and others keep ceding.

You are to be complimented for your opposition herm.

And of course, Mark Twain's time reflected different values. What's the import of that? Have we regressed and abandoned some of those values, our rights of free thought and free expression? Here I thought that such values were to be expanded in modern times. Do you approve of delegation of authority to a racial minority to coerce and dictate limitations on thought and expression and access to materials to the general community?

#115 | Posted by herm at 2009-06-08 08:01 PM

And let Johnson live by "The Princess And The Pea." With equanimity. We shall hope that he doesn't pick up his trusty .45 and assassinate a physician or politician to get even. herm

Are you fading in and out of consciousness again, herm? Just what is the connection between "The Princess and the Pea" and your reference to assassinating a physician or politician? Again, the connection seems to exist in your own mind if at all, but is not disclosed by you.

Sorry herm. I'll let you be.

Then we can blame Christians for Obama's failures.

#117 | Posted by Ray

No, But you can blame Obama for the failures of Christians. He is the Messiah is he not? Hell, he's apologized for everything else.

#90 | Posted by JonO

Obviously missed Oprah last week with the lesbians who chose to be lesbians.

The ones that were hetero--married and had children and had awful divorces.

They decided it was simpler--"No games" and easier to be with another woman than go with another man.

As for this story--

I wonder if it is a book for 10th graders and up --if they would not allow a 5th grader to pick it up?

I am sure they would.

They let people view porn on the internet in the library--why not books?


Burning books is loony.

And the city won't pay these folks anything. Their claims will be denied and then they will have to file suit for emotional distress, blah blah blah.

This jsut for Herm since we all know that ONLY the right wing tryis to Ban/Silence speech they dont like/agree with!
Mark Belling was prevented from speaking at The University of Wisconsin due to threats of violence.
US Army Chief of Staff Gen. William Westmoreland in 72 at Yale was prevented from speaking @ the Law Aditorium(i'm sure it was the College Republicans that did this!)
I'm so sure that all the People who ever wanted Huck Finn banned vote Republican, LOL.
What about the MinuteMen and Haaarvard(or was it Yale?) stage was stormed and his speech was effectivly "banned" from being heard by others. make no mistake ANY silencing of a opinion is CENSORSHIP.
There is NO legitimacy to "Hecklers Veto". It's a tactic used by those who cannot come up with a well thought-out, planned, consistant and defendable position to counter speech they do not like.

#80 | Posted by GotTruth at 2009-06-08 02:49 PM | Reply | Flag:


Three of your 4 examples were Colleges. The institution in this story is a Public Library.

No, But you can blame Obama for the failures of Christians. He is the Messiah is he not? Hell, he's apologized for everything else.

#120 | Posted by STIRSUMUP


Newsweek guy called him god!

And maybe not the God--but a god of some kind.

Groundhog Day...

#123 | Posted by COMMONSENSE

Common--this is a story about free speech.

Check Rcade's posts above.

Herm made the post that only the folks on the right try to stop speech.


Got posted examples of folks on the left who try to stop speech.

Gosh, Censor Librorum. To whom have you passed the baton.

Subject: ON BEHALF OF THE UNION FOR REFORM JUDAISM
Author: Rabbi David Saperstein
Posting Date: 6/2/09
Location: Washington, D.C.

On behalf of the Union for Reform Judaism, whose more than 900 congregations across North America include 1.5 million Reform Jews, and the Central Conference of American Rabbis, whose membership includes more than 1,800 Reform rabbis, I write out of concern about the Sunday, May 31st edition of your popular comic strip, Doonesbury. . . . . . . .

www.doonesbury.com

Please read the Rabbi's letter in full at the above site and then discuss censorship. When perhaps the greatest cartoonist ever is criticized and held to account for a perceived and, in my opinion, non existing slight. The matter needs airing fully in the court of public opinion.

I decide what my kids read and don't read. And the truth is they can hear all those bad words and derogatory comments by watch HBO for an hour.

you have HBO?

why you liberal... traitor!

thank you herm.. what a pleasure.

"FWTHOM-
How are your kids coming along on the "bitch slap the librarian" class?"

more than likely the grandkidss avoid GrandPa like the plague which is normal for kids that have right wingers for grand parents.

FWTHOM is a bigot, racist and dumb shit. What kid wants to deal with that.

I'd never try to censor a book. It only lends free publicity to it.

Please read the Rabbi's letter in full at the above site and then discuss censorship. When perhaps the greatest cartoonist ever is criticized and held to account for a perceived and, in my opinion, non existing slight. The matter needs airing fully in the court of public opinion.

#128 | Posted by Sord


For what Reformed Jews are just wannabe Jews. I'm serious what do Orthodox Jews think about it?

Any ideas about what to do with both flavors of book-burners?

Throw the book at them?

* ducks *

I'd never try to censor a book. It only lends free publicity to it.

Tru dat.

When Spud reads about some group or another trying to ban or burn a specifi book Spud's first reaction typically is...

Better get a copy to read quickly!

Wot these guys consider a list of reprehensible books worth destroying Spud sees as a viable potential reading list.

Same same for Tipper Gores idear of putting warning labels on records.

Found out about some bands Spud prolly never woulda looked at twice otherwise.

Ta to Tipster and them Talibaptist types, btw, fer THAT.

/Sometimes the law of unintended consequences has a real up side to it.

Be Well.

it's just another indoctrination tactic for our youth. nothing to see here.

Yes, God forbid children should learn about tolerance, acceptance, and the unparalleled value of a strong, supportive family.

This has become institutionalized with use of euphemistic language hiding the insidious effect of catering to the increasingly aggressive demands of groups for whom no boundary has been established.

Johnson, this thread is about book burning. You seem to be talking about "enhanced interrogation techniques" and the continued detention of "enemy combatants" in legal limbo at Guantanamo.

Newsweek guy called him god!

#124 | Posted by MURPHY at 2009-06-08 08:50 PM

Yes Muffy, and I'm sure you considered Duhhbya a "god" as he and Danger Dick were running the country into the ground.

Wow, that is just too cool dude!

RT
www.anonymity.2ya.com

The liberal way of teaching tolerance for deviant behavior through stupid books to children is to use the "N" word, the "B" word, cuss a lot and use gay porn as examples. Then they wrap the whole garbage pile in the cloaking device called free speech. Libs are so enlightened and mature.

It seems a few people have a hard time determining what censorship is in the eyes of the law and how it relates to free speech. The law really only sees censorship as state sponsored censorship and censorship of the press. Private entities can censor whatever the hell they what. Such censorship is actually protected by the first amendment in a round-about way. A speaker at a rally or event has no right NOT to be shouted down by the crowd. The crowd is expressing its rights not to listen to someone they already disagree with. The speaker has no more right to his opinion then the crowd does. As a private function it's up to the people holding the event to decide how to handle such a situation. Private entities are not bound to expound, nor give platform to, views they disagree with. Public libraries on the other hand answer to courts and the law and book banning in such situations can rightly be called censorship.

And a quick note about the artist noted above. She displayed a dead fetus which was against the school's policy of displaying dead bodies. She cried censorship (though the rest of her exhibit remained) an they actually let her put the work back up a couple weeks later. Not the best example or censorship. True censorship would be the catholic churches view on it:

"In general, censorship of books is a supervision of the press in order to prevent any abuse of it. In this sense, every lawful authority, whose duty it is to protect its subjects from the ravages of a pernicious press, has the right of exercising censorship of books."
--The Catholic Encyclopedia

""In general, censorship of books is a supervision of the press in order to prevent any abuse of it. In this sense, every lawful authority, whose duty it is to protect its subjects from the ravages of a pernicious press, has the right of exercising censorship of books."
--The Catholic Encyclopedia"

That's a joke...right????

#138 | Posted by redfoxone at 2009-06-09 08:33 AM | Reply | Flag:

The liberal way of teaching tolerance for deviant behavior through stupid books to children is to use the "N" word, the "B" word, cuss a lot and use gay porn as examples. Then they wrap the whole garbage pile in the cloaking device called free speech. Libs are so enlightened and mature.

Teaching tolerance is just that: teaching tolerance. It's too bad you seem to have a problem with that. So following your line of thought you agree with the NAACP back in the 90s when some chapters tried to get Huck Finn banned?

"Three of your 4 examples were Colleges."

Ah but they are PUBLIC schools(College) so the 1st amendment still is in effect. Now if they were PRIVATE schools(College) they could do what ever they wished with speakers/books/information ect...


"If they want this burned, how would they feel If I wiped my ass with the bible and burned a stack of bibles?"

Well Rasta, as long as they are yours and you paid for them, They cant do shit about it. ITs your right to FREE Expression.

damn, stupid is runnin' thick on this thread.

Banning a book like Huck Finn is 100% proof positive that you cannot read or comprehend intellectual ideas past a 4th grade level.

It amazes me that many promoting free speech on this are the same people that shout down, call others names as well as telling them to "STFU" to those that does not agree with them. A little bit hypocritical, isn't it?

About your colleges? I can't find a single reference to Belling and death threats. Either way that's not censorship. Speakers at public colleges have a right to speak only as far as the college wants them to be there. A public college has no obligation under the First Amendment to not cancel any speaking engagement they want for any reason they want.

The rest of your examples are students drowning out and not allowing a speaker to talk. That's called protest and it is protected by the First Amendment. The speaker has no more right to speak than they do. While you may not agree with tactics it certainly isn't censorship.

The quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia above is censorship. What these people in the article and the NAACP have tried is censorship, as it is denying any public outlet for the material.

Just the very thought of burning books brings up the famous 1984 book concerning burning of books. The article didn't get into quoiting the books in question but unless they are blatant and genuinely pornographic, I am against it. This is a real world to some of us and not all things in it are going to please all peoples or groups. If the parents of the children being exposed to such material have taught their children well there wouldn't be any problem of exposure to offensive material. (real or imagined) Book burning h as been a tool of so many organization from all sides of an issue. Information should never have to be restricted but rather left alone by those who feel offended. Removing books is removing knowledge good or bad. Make your own choices and allow other to do likewise.

Just the very thought of burning books brings up the famous 1984 book concerning burning of books.


Actually, that was Fahrenheit 451.

"If my greatgrandkids brought that gay porno book home I would read it in the bathroom and then burn it and then bitch slap the librarian, unless she was bigger than me. They don't have a right to push this stuff to my greatgrandkids.

Posted by fwthom"

it's just another indoctrination tactic for our youth. nothing to see here.

burn it? no. move it to the adult section? probably.

#14 | Posted by nanc

The reason pompous statements like this are made is because those who believe it engage in their own indoctrination tactics on the other side. The religious pontificators use their own publications to persuade and cajole others into "seeing the light", so they make the unwarranted and non sequitur assumption that all other written material must be for the same purpose. They think that because a book has a gay theme, that it must be to convince the reader to "become gay".

After all, they proselytize with THEIR books to convince people to become, and to stay, religious. (Note that I do not say "Christian" here. There are many religions and denominations thereof that do this, and also indulge in this sort of incorrectly commutative thinking.)

There are, however, SOME faiths that do not proselytize, that write their books to inform others about their faith with no demand that they embrace it, or simply to celebrate their faith. These religions also seem to be the same ones that don't automatically condemn others for being who and what they are. Funny how that works.

I find it interesting that these highly-religious persons, belonging to a faith that finds homosexually-themed literature to be not only abhorrent, but of an indoctrinary nature, subjected themselves to the contents to a sufficient degree to be "damaged" by them. One would think that reading the synopsis on Amazon, or the blurb on the back of the book in the library -- or even the first few pages -- would be sufficient to ascertain that this was a book that was not within their "comfort zone".

A book is an interesting device. It has this odd little function. It stops imparting information when one closes the covers and places it back on the shelf. I have yet to find a book that continued to pour it's information into my brain after I ceased to read it. If I had this ability, studying algebra would have been much easier in high school.

As for whether GLBT-themed books "indoctrinate" anyone...I never read a gay themed ANYTHING until I was 16, and saw a reference to it in a magazine. My parents had very carefully kept it all from me with a studious vengeance. I thought a "faggot" was a bundle of sticks. But I was queer as a lemonade sandwich, and knew it. I just didn't know what it was *called*, or that there were a whole lot of others out there like me. I just knew that I liked making out with girls. The fact that I was one...well, that was a bit of a wrinkle. Didn't stop me from finding two girlfriends before I was 15, though. We just didn't talk about it.

Was I "indoctrinated"? Hell no. The LAST thing my parents would have wanted was a queer child. I just knew what I liked.

"I can't find a single reference to Belling and death threats"

Did I SAY "Death Threrats"? No. You did. ALL I said was "Threats of Violence" Violence does not mean Death Threats. Also look for a archive of the print story in "Millwaukee Journal" that was the paper that carried the local stroy and report.

The right wants to burn books they dislike though they don't even read the ones they supposedly like.
I think their real beef is with readers.

Danni,
That is among the most accurate quotes I have ever seen from you. NW all the way!

"it's just another indoctrination tactic for our youth."
For some reason certain people remain convinced that it's possible to "turn" gay, even though it has been well-established that orientation is completely determined within the first few years of a child's life.
And seeing as there have been gays since the beginning of humanity (it's been historically documented), it makes little sense to blame it on the media or on liberals, let alone the so-called "gay agenda".
Anyways, the book in question is not pornography. It's a book which details the life of a typical gay person coming to terms with the relentless conflict between their own identity and that bigoted section of the population that chooses to not accept them for who they are. The only way anyone might find this book offensive is if they're homophobic and believe that their religious beliefs entitle them to discriminate freely against gays- if I may paraphrase the pope.
I find it laughable that people sincerely think they are just when they cite the bible as the basis for their discrimination when they don't even follow half the stuff in it literally. Picking and choosing is the true essence of religious institutions.

"The rest of your examples are students drowning out and not allowing a speaker to talk. That's called protest and it is protected by the First Amendment. The speaker has no more right to speak than they do. While you may not agree with tactics it certainly isn't censorshi."

Wow. man. Denial is not just a river in Egypt is it?

Dude if you prevent someone from speaking you have in effect CENSORED them. That isnt protest, that is CENSORSHIP to prevent a person from being heard! A protest of a speaker would occur OUTSIDE the Aditorium not in the Seats, thats for the people who wish to DEBATE in the Q & A session.

#152 | Posted by danni

That reminds me of:

I was in Nashville, Tennesee last year. After the show, I went to a Waffle House. I'm not proud of it, I was hungry. And I'm eating, I'm alone and I'm reading a book, right? Waitress walks over to me: 'Hey, what you readin' for?' Is that like the weirdest fucking question you've ever heard? Not what am I reading, but what am I reading ... for. 'Well, God damn it, you stumped me. Why do I read? Hmm ... I guess I read for a lot of reasons, and the main one is ... so I don't end up being a fucking waffle waitress.' But then, this trucker in the next booth gets up, stands over me and goes: 'Well, looks like we got ourselves a reader.' What the fuck's going on here? It's not like I walked into a Klan rally in a Boy George outfit, God damn it. It's a book!
-Bill Hicks

ah is there anything Bill Hicks CANT teach us?

Gottruth, you are still not understanding the legal basis of censorship. People don't have a right to talk at a public function anymore than the audience has a right to argue with them. Shouting a speaker down, while distasteful, in no way constitutes censorship. There are endless public outlets all the speakers you mentioned can turn to. If the STATE denied them those outlets, that would be censorship. It's really quite simple. The same laws that protect one citizen's right to their opinion in a public forum protect another citizen's right to tell them to shut up because they think they are wrong. Censorship is defined as being institutionalized.

WHenever someone is PREVENTED from being heard it is CENSORSHIP! I dont care if it is a Private Citizen or a State actor. The result is the same; the squashing of a persons Free Expression.

Are you saying its OK to STOP BY FORCE(shout down, Hecklers Veto) and Idea or Sentence YOU dont like, or you deem offensive?

The private Citizen AND the STate Actor are bound by The Bill of Rights.

"If the STATE denied them those outlets, that would be censorship"

No it would force you to go to another location but you would still get to SPEAK. But yes the STATE must afford equal opprotunity To speak and not have oprotunity to be heard is the same as to have never spoken at all.

Gottruth, I'm not trying to argue here but since you want to: there isn't a court in the land that would say protesters speaking louder than an invited speaker in any way fits legal definitions of censorship nor previously tried First Amendment cases. There are plenty of actual cases of censorship out there. I have no clue why you're harping on these nonstarters.

OK so there is no issue with 100 full hood KKK memeber surrounding and verbally berrating a peacfull low speaking INVITED Afirmative action supported. OR 100 botton wielding berret wearing Black Panther Screaming and Barrating a INVITED speaker not happy with Afirative Ation? Or 100 visous La Razza Race Sepritist sourrounding a INVITED speaker.

got it, my bad.

My bad. Like my spelling today, jeezus its been to much coffee today!

Buy the book and burn it, if that's what you want to do.
Four-hundred fifty-one degrees, my friends.
(Unless, of course, the built-in explosives are remotely detonated.)

Gottruth--you have two different issues. One is probably assault or unlawful use of force. The other is censorship. By legal definitions. I'll check with my lawyer pal next week, when he's home.

I have an issue with all behaviors stopping someone from expression. But legal terms are legal terms.

Gottruth, there could be an issue if they threatened the speaker or if the host of the event, if it were private, wanted the people removed. Neither would censorship though. To take your example a little further: you can't stop racist KKK members from lining up beside a civil rights march and screaming their lungs out. They're in public. That would be a violation of the First Amendment.

Now, a better point would be to see where the government does sanction censorship such as in when it gets to decide what "obscene" is or when protesters are corralled in small areas such as the DNC and RNC.

Bear in mind I'm not saying I approve of booing a person off stage. What I am saying is it's just as much the audience's right to speak as the speaker at a public event. And that's not censorship as the term is legally applied. If the speaker decided to walk out to a street corner and give his speech and a cop arrested him for it? Then you have a case for First Amendment Violations.

Common--this is a story about free speech.

Check Rcade's posts above.

Herm made the post that only the folks on the right try to stop speech.


Got posted examples of folks on the left who try to stop speech.

#126 | Posted by MURPHY at 2009-06-08 08:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

I see that.

My point still stands.

I wish I had the video to show you from the Brian Williams White House tour last week that had Michelle Obama reading a letter from a little black girl who talked about how it was hard for her and her friends at school knowing that many people looked at them as, "soon to be criminals and dopers", just because of their color and not because of the content of their character.

Minorities still have a hard enough time in this country without the propagation of racial slurs.

It ain't funny, Jones.

#35 | Posted by Corky

What a load of bullshit. But what post of yours isn't. Kids who act out and are bullies and skip class, smoke cigarettes, cuss, and overall behave badly will be looked upon as kids who will grow up to be a bad person. Kids who act properly in school are accepted as friends no matter what their color. The girl who wrote the letter must not behave very well if that's how she's looked upon.

SCRUMPLET,

Lets compare two sides of the open mindedness scale. On one side is the Taliban. That's the side of non-existent open mindedness. Then on the other side you have Amsterdam, Netherlands. If you know anything about the Netherlands, you know it is a liberal country. Only 39% of the people are religiously affiliated. That percentage is dropping as 31% of those under age 35 are affiliated. Drugs, abortion, pornography are all legal. If you look in other places in Europe you see similarities. Europe is becoming more secular than the US.

Businessweek did a recent listing of top cities to live in. It is not surprising to me that almost all of them were from countries even more secular than the US. In fact only one city in the continental US was on the top 30 list. None of the places the Taliban hangs out in were on the list.

I should not be punished nor denied things because you cannot control your children. When I go to the library, I want to see as many types of reading material as possible and be allowed to choose something awful if I want to.

This is yet another attempt to hold the world responsible for the raising of one person's (or group's)children. It should not matter what media are available. It matters that parents instill positive values in their children and take responsibilty for correcting inappropriate behavior (like reading 'bad' books). A compassionate, open-minded, and moral adult is a far stronger influence on a child than any book on a library shelf.

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable