|plan2succeed.org||library porn removal||crime/filter examples||publications||donations||links||contact us|
another nail in the coffin of the ala: the ala recommends giving children books like "rainbow party." "a 'rainbow party,' you see, is a gathering of boys and girls for the purpose of engaging in group oral sex. each girl wears a different colored lipstick and leaves a mark on each boy. at night's end, the boys proudly sport their own cosmetically sealed rainbow you-know-where -- bringing a whole new meaning to the concept of 'party favors.'" an ala representative said the book is good because "it's a way for kids to experience something at a safe distance" and "unless you read stuff that's perhaps not the most literary, you'll never understand what good works are." the ala promotes this book in its list of nominations for "quick picks for reluctant young adult readers."
how safe is your own public library? get a fill-in form here.
see examples of crimes and filters in other libraries updated daily.
1) the ala believes children may access inappropriate material because it would be age discimination to keep them from seeing it.
2) the ala creates lists of books containing inappropriate selections for children of different grades.
3) the ala has in the past guided children to inappropriate web sites like those discussing autoerotic asphyxiation, bestiality, fisting, etc.
4) president clinton signed into law the children's internet protection act [cipa] that requires public libraries to essentially filter all public library computers.
5) after years of efforts to protect children in public libraries, the us supreme court struck down each attempt as unconstitutional until cipa. in june 2003, cipa was found to be constitutional in us v. ala and libraries receiving federal funding must now filter all computers. the case de facto decided issues that apply to libraries not taking federal funding as well.
6) after constant efforts to defy all three branches of the federal government calling for the installation of internet filters in all public library computers, the ala in february 2005 placed in writing that all libraries are advised to defy cipa and us v. ala for the very same reasons proven wrong in us v. ala. the ala provides guidance to librarians on how to effectuate this policy.
7) some libraries that would have had filters because of us v. ala have chosen not to install those filters because they instead comply with the ala's directive to defy the law.
8) in some of those libraries children are raped, assaulted, and molested by other patrons viewing unfiltered internet pornography that might not have been on those computers had the filters been installed as required by the law.
9) the ala, therefore, may be directly responsible for the rape, assault, and molestation of children. we already know the ala is the leading national organization pushing pornography and other inappropriate material on children in public libraries and public schools.
10) are there no consequences when a national organization uses its power to influence local public libraries to defy the law in a way that may directly result in serious harm to children nationwide? is there no way to force the ala to comply with the law and advocate compliance with the law? can they be sued in court for rape, etc., or could local library boards of trustees be sued for violating their fiduciary duty to the citizens, not the ala -- by the way, do libraries lose a portion of their autonomy when they advocate policies in defiance of the law, thereby allowing local governments to step in and take action? can the irs revoke their tax exempt status? can financial donors stop supporting the ala until it complies with the law? could you or i defy the law with impunity? does telling the truth about the ala and asking these questions make one seem out of line or is it the ala's policies that are out of line with the mainstream and the law?
bonus 11) "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." by dan gerstein, an independent consultant, former communications director for joe lieberman and a senior strategist for his presidential campaign.
bonus 12) who said in response to us v. ala , "maybe once in a while, [the justices] ought to go to a public library. everybody in america - and especially republicans in congress - share the view that when school gets out, kids are running to the library to look at pornography on the internet. it's not happening." answer: beverly public library director tom scully speaking in 2003. scully was charged in april 2005 with disseminating obscene material to a minor. police said he had a two-year relationship with a boy he encountered using a library computer to access sexual content.
bonus 13) see an excellent letter from a library director that could be a model for all communities: finally, a library director who gets it.
bonus 14) read ala policies make a librarian's life difficult.
u.s. supreme court, united states et. al. v. american library association, inc., et. al., no. 02-361, syllabus and opinion of the court. argued march 5, 2003-decided june 23, 2003.
click on a justice to view his or her opinion.