| 
|
Page: Profile: Wren's Nest News Local
| Total Views: 4,938,605
|
Article: 19457
[Civil]
Date Posted:
3/9/2008
8:06:35 am EDT
Wvox Stats
Views: 6,703
RSS: 27,043
Comments: 18
|
Ohio Library Sued For Canceling Religious Meeting
Author: AP Source: Zanesville Times Recorder (OH)
Title: OHIO LIBRARY SUED FOR CANCELING RELIGIOUS MEETING
A federal lawsuit accuses a suburban library of violating the rights of a conservative group whose members were told they could not use a community meeting room for singing and praying.
Citizens for Community Values, a Cincinnati-based group that spearheaded the 2004 amendment that bans gay marriages in Ohio, says in the lawsuit filed Friday that the Upper Arlington Public Library was wrong to cancel a meeting planned for Feb. 27.
Library Director Ann Moore told the group it could not hold the meeting if it included religious elements, according to the lawsuit.
| Options: [Read Full Story] [Comments Locked]
[Email to a Friend]
|
|
Community Thoughts: There are 18 comments posted | Reverse Sort |
| This Is Not About Free Speech | Mar 12th. at 5:46:30 pm EDT
|
Sela (Happyplace, New York) - Email Me
"Library officials said praying and singing are elements of a religious service, which is not allowed under library policy."
"The library does not refuse the use of meeting rooms for discussions," spokeswoman Ruth McNeil said. "You can discuss faith, family values or war. This is a place for public discussion. The opportunity to meet here was - and still is - open to them."
They can meet for a public discussion but they can't use the library grounds to hold a prayer service...
Good...
|
| Amen! | Mar 11th. at 10:29:22 am EDT
|
Sy (Atlanta, Georgia) - Email Me
The lawsuit is a waste of public tax dollars!
With the facts in, I have to say: the group should be allowed to meet to discuss public policy and their religion, they should not be allowed to meet to worship God. Glad the library set up that distinction.
|
| Public-private | Mar 10th. at 5:04:18 pm EDT
|
Furos (Huntsville, Ontario) - Email Me
That's the real problem here, not thier values or religion. It's a public library. If it were a private venune, so long as they don't violate any rental agreements, then they should be allowed to do and say whatever they want, up to and including willfully premoting hatred. But not violence... even free speach has it's limits.
Since they want to borrow the area from a public source, government owned, they have to abide by the rules put there. Most (all, acutally) of which are set at a far higher standered then any private dwelling, land or rental area.
Like say, pagans trying to rent Legion hall space and being denied for some stupid reason and havign to go to a private hall (owned by a Church ironcly enough) to hold a meeting.
It is discrimination to deny access based on WHO wants to speak there but it is not discrimination to deny access based on the WHAT will be done therein.
If I were to request permission to hold a sky clad meeting in a public park in the middle of the May 24 (Victoria Day) weekend I might very well be denied- not becasue I'm a pagan, but because we plan on dancing in front of crowds that will likely contain children and possibly offend older people who don't want to see us with all of our dangly bits hanging out.
I know this isen't an exact comparision to the Christian group who want the library, but in both cases a reasonable accomidation could very easily be met if we (they) would stop whining about oppression and sit down and make a comprimise.
|
| Finding Of Fact | Mar 10th. at 12:58:04 pm EDT
|
Terry (Irvington, Virginia) - Email Me - Web
An article based on a predatory religious bigot group like ADF is automatically suspect, while this article is light on fact. I might suspect some real issues of RLUIPA that could be tricky in this kind of complaint (and require detailed fact finding and judicial analysis) , but a quick search shows 42 USC 1983 (simple equal protections) as the cause of action for this Federal suit. [Web LINK]
Upper Arlington Public Library has clearly posted policies that impress me as seriously trying to comply with legal obligations, and follow professional standards, shaped by likely experience under fire. ADF is a successor to NFLF, which in turn is an offshoot of "Citizens for Decent Literature", an instigator and Amicus party to the 1964 case Jacobellis v Ohio. That's the one known for the running joke based on Potter Stewart's legal analysis, "pornography is whatever gives the judge a hard on." More seriously, Justice Stewart explained a legal position that should have been used also in the "Pacifica" case rather than give "indecency" standing as if a legal rather than religious and bigotry based concept, finding that "pornography" is a subjective term failing to meet minimum legal standards to avoid being "void for vagueness". That averted any need to consider the religious or cultural prejudices underlying speech content or censorship demands, based on issues explicitly illegal for government to favor or disfavor.
LFP, inc, better known for Larry Flynt Publication's Hustler magazine and stores, is also local to the area, and is in fact part of its history. This library maintains area historic archives, which has likely resulted in interesting conflicts, which their posted collection and public objection policies address better than most. As a start, they require that any objections can only be lodged by persons who've read the cited work in full and considered any objectionable content as part of the whole, not based on (they don't say specifically) RRR nasty bullies bitching based on national instigator hit lists, and persons with no clue what the overall work is about playing local lynch mob members. They also cite industry professional credential based expert judgement as the standard for collection inclusion, allowing wide judgment, but potentially including materials about a Meese Commission report or Hustler store in local history, but excluding content without a relevant educational or information purpose.
The library meeting room info is here [Web LINK] , and the policy and usage agreement is here: [Web LINK]
OK, solid factual details, not an ADF faux-xtian propaganda posture. Clearly the library favors non-profit groups, gives library functions top priority, but allows any individual or business to use its space on a secondary basis, content neutral, so long as the use is open to the public, non-commercial, and doesn't disrupt other activities in the library or include direct or indirect solicitations.
That would appear to fail an equal protections claim under the cited cause of action as filed in Federal court documents.
There is some room for policy interpretation, however. Is this particular group's planned usage equivalent to a retirement seminar, being used to solicit money or members indirectly, as would violate policy regardless of religious or political or business ideological content viewpoint? Is the group by proposing music violating limits that do allow amplified sound and some specific audiovisual equipment, library or user provided? Is the meeting intended to be open to the public, where local porn shop managers, PFLAG or GLAAD activists, or others RRR groups typically try to defame and exlude, be welcome, and welcome to openly not participate in any defamatory hate cult preyer [sic] activities? Is the library policy that use of its meeting rooms is "for cultural activities and discussion of public questions and social issues" neutral (probably under the cited cause for action, maybe, or not, under RLUIPA but that's not the cited primary action here, and that depending on whether a library is a public forum, or a limited public forum as might be more applicable here) .
My suspicion is that "Citizens for Community Values" is acting in ways harmful to minors and the community by filing a baseless action to try to intimidate and bully the library, and consuming resources otherwise used to help community members. ADF is clearly funding the Plaintiff legal services. It may not be wise for this library to settle out of court, as to limit future attacks by such groups, this kind of case requires expensive and protracted litigation. However, the benefit of that is not about underlying issues of library policy, assuming that from what I see it's carefully drafted to survive legal challenge. It's about crushing nasty bullies and dangerous thugs of the RRR, such that other similar groups are less inclined to be used as minions of ADF, CDC, and their ilk. That requires running up 6 figure legal bills over a few years of trial preliminaries, and moving into an appeals case. If that can be done, and if the structure and backers of Citizens for Community Values is such that a prevailing parties costs and fees recovery can be made against both that organization and individual leaders (which is a risky effort if an empty shell corporation unless they aren't well shielded) , then it's possible that in a depressed area of low home values, several RRR "family values" types could find their mortgages foreclosed and their families homeless, paying legal fees for malicious litigation. That would be a valuable educational lesson for this library to teach, albeit their Directors are likely trying to avoid that waste of time and budget, and not motivated to openly treat RRR pathological predators and nasty bullies as what they are, a community hazard to be reduced in resources and disposed of in any way possible.
Find More info -- HERE
|
| Oh Puh-lease | Mar 10th. at 6:47:23 am EDT
|
Chatoyancy (Louisville, Tennessee) - Email Me
I've worked in public libraries for almost ten years--five different libraries in two different states (one in an ultra-conservative area) . Most cities/towns have policies set in black in white on what's allowed and what's not. Most times groups that use meeting rooms must sign a meeting room policy/agreement. It's nothing to do with supporting or discriminating against any religion. Suing the library is suing the city/town, which breaks down into suing every single member of that community, which equals increased taxes. If it's bad enough the city/town may just close the library to make up the loss. Brilliant.
|
| Do As I Say.... | Mar 10th. at 6:13:24 am EDT
|
stalkingwolf (Bullhead City, Arizona) - Email Me
here is a short quote from the article that pretty well sums up the attitude and mentality of this group and others like it.
"Citizens for Community Values, a Cincinnati-based group that spearheaded the 2004 amendment that bans gay marriages in Ohio, "
"Christian groups shouldn't be discriminated against for their beliefs," said Tim Chandler, an attorney with Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative Christian legal group that joined the lawsuit.
So they push for the denial of rights for one group
yet demand that they be given special rights.
perhaps the local outhouse would better suit.
|
| Covert Activities... | Mar 9th. at 4:59:42 pm EDT
|
bigcat (peoria, Illinois) - Email Me
Neither their beliefs nor the room was in contention. The possibility of disruption to the other patrons may have been. Some revivalist groups are pretty loud, and the probability that they might not have confined that religious service to that room was also possible.
Some groups lately have attempted to actively disrupt certain places in order to proselytize and "spread the good word" to everyone, whether or not it is wanted--and often- it isn't, then complain and whine about their rights when rebuffed.
Where are the patrons rights in such cases? Don't they deserve to be able to seek a book, write a report or read in a quiet setting without being harrassed and proselytized by some wannabe Fundy group pulling some hit and run tactic?
Perhaps if they allowed the use of the room-on the stern proviso that that is where the group stays and keep their hands and literature to themselves and be relatively quiet in their "service" there shouldn't be too much problem-- that is unless, breaking the rules was what they meant to do.
In which case the library should have the right to refuse such disruptions.
|
| Would Like To See What Happens. | Mar 9th. at 4:57:35 pm EDT
|
Bookworm (Saint Paul, Minnesota) - Email Me
Public library systems in the U.S. are independent, so they have a right to set their own policies. They do, however, have to comply with the First Amendment. If they let one religious group hold service in their library, they legally have to give the same right to any and all religious groups that apply.
I strongly suspect that the library’s policy is actually meant to avoid too much controversy. They do not want to put up with the protests and complaints that would inevitably surface if a group wanted to hold a Pagan, Satanist, or (insert controversial minority religion here) ceremony in the library. It might even be a way to avoid lawsuits from pro Church/State Separation organizations who find the use of public library spaces as ersatz churches suspect. It’s easier to simply have a policy that states that no religious service are allowed with clear guidelines as to what constitutes a service.
If the church wins the lawsuit, I can see this coming out a lot like the “backpack mail” case in the Virginia public schools a while back. Some guy had his kids take Bible camp fliers to school and wanted the teachers to distribute them to the rest of the students. The school refused, citing a policy that forbid distributing material from religious groups. The conservative Christian press screamed and hollered that they were being discriminated against by the godless public school system. A conservative Christian legal group sued the school and they were forced to change the policy. After the ruling, a Unitarian church decided that the conservative churches shouldn’t be the only ones being heard and submitted a flier inviting children to a Pagan solstice ritual. In compliance with the new policy, the school distributed it. The conservative Christian press went ape screaming that the school was promoting a non-Christian religion.
Bottom line: this is not a case about the church being discriminated against. They were given clear guidelines about what would and would not be allowed under library policy and refused to comply. This is yet another case of the Christian Right demanding religious liberties that they would be unwilling to share with any other faith.
|
| I Find It Hypocritical... | Mar 9th. at 2:17:14 pm EDT
|
Nocturnal Light (Camp Humphreys, Kansas) - Email Me
...that this group is trying to get the government to deny the freedoms of people who supposedly don't follow their moral codes (banning gay marriage) and then complaining that the government is denying their own "freedoms". That's karma for ya.
Anyway I'm sure they have their own facilities for their worship. While I don't think religion should be censored from the public square, the library can set their own rules as long as they don't show bias towards any particular group.
|
| This Library Has A Clear Policy | Mar 9th. at 1:36:36 pm EDT
|
Shadowbear (Hillsboro, Oregon) - Email Me
I always appreciate folks with a clear policy, makes life easier - that they don't allow religious services in their community room - and praying & singing makes the difference between discussion of religion which is allowed and a religious service which is not allowed. This group can still hold its meeting and have the discussion they propose, just no singing and praying. They proposed a nice discussion, might even get a bit heated if they allowed those who disagree with them to join in. Why do they need to sing praise for heaven's sake? It is not necessary to christianity to burst into song at every meeting. Prayer could even be sneeked in if they are determined but it is hard to hide singing. Maybe prayer without the songs does not equal a religious service and would be permitted.
They are making a very large fuss over something that is NOT descriminating against them. I'll bet I could rent that very room for a discussion of pagan religions but they would not let me hold a circle there with chanting, incense, drumming and, maybe trance dancing just for fun. Possibly the library does not have very good sound insulation and that is why they don't allow religious ceremonies. Or maybe they got burned by having a church group rent the space too often rather than find a real church space. Who knows, as long as their policy is uniformly applied and easy to understand where the lines are, not descrimination.
|
| Wait A Sec.... | Mar 9th. at 12:04:08 pm EDT
|
Young Coyote (W. Hempstead, California) - Email Me
Don't fundies have, I don't know, churches to do this in? Why do they need a library?
They probably just wanted a more public pulpit and/or are looking for another way to cry victim.
Likewise if the library already has a set policy to not host religious services, than I think the fundies should just STFU and go back to their church. Religious discussion has a place in public buildings such as libraries and schools. Worship does not.
|
| That Isn't Right... | Mar 9th. at 12:01:22 pm EDT
|
Phoenix Star-seeker (Poulsbo, Washington) - Email Me
As much as I dislike what this religious group stands for, I have to say that I agree with them. I work in a public library, and I know for a fact that some churches (who don't yet have their own property, I'm assuming) , uses one of the library community rooms for religious services. And in fact, just yesterday the same room was being used by some group that involved singing. It was loud enough to be heard by the rest of the library, but it was faint and didn't seem to bother any of the patrons. As long as the rooms are properly sequestered from the rest of the library, I don't see why this library should close it's doors to this group. That is discrimination, in a place that's supposed to be neutral.
|
| Kudos To The Library | Mar 9th. at 9:44:15 am EDT
|
Aritimi Morgana (RotterdamJct/Schdy/Scotia, New York) - Email Me
if those ignorant yahoo fundies want to hold their meetings that include prayer, then they should use their own religious facilities, NOT a library. Having their ilk engaging in their hateful diatribes is, to me at least, a desecration of a library. I know there are issues of free speech, but if there are rules of not permitting religious activities in the library, then they ought to respect those rules. Sounds like another attempt to place themselves in the role of victim. I swear, they must plan this stuff in advance so they can get as much publicity for their hate speech. All hail the library, the sanctuary of knowledge!
|
| I Love The Alliance Legal Defense Fund,... | Mar 9th. at 8:49:16 am EDT
|
Sailordada (Wheeling, Illinois) - Email Me
... because if Christian ceremonies are allowed at public libraries that means Pagan ceremonies will be too. We wouldn't want to violate the Anti-Establishment clause in the first amendment.
.., (sarcasm off) ...
|
Disclaimer: The Witches' Voice inc does not verify the accuracy of the details stated in this listing, nor do we vouch for the value of the goods or services presented here... As with all contacts and financial dealings in cyberspace, we encourage you to use caution and wisdom in your dealings with strangers.
Political Statements: Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren's Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches' Voice, Inc. TWV is a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization.
|
State/Country flags created by 3dflags.com and are used with permission
Web Site Content (including: text - graphics - html - look & feel)
Copyright 1997-2009 The Witches' Voice Inc. All rights reserved
Note: Authors & Artists retain the copyright for their work(s) on this website.
Unauthorized reproduction without prior permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Website structure, evolution and php coding by Fritz Jung on a Macintosh G5.
Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren’s Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches’ Voice, Inc. TWV is a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization.
Sponsorship: Visit the Witches' Voice Sponsor Page for info on how you
can help support this Community Resource. Donations ARE Tax Deductible.
The Witches' Voice carries a 501(c)(3) certificate and a Federal Tax ID.
Mail Us: The Witches' Voice Inc., P.O. Box 341018, Tampa, Florida 33694-1018 U.S.A.
| |
