Library Juice 2:37 Supplement - Library Juice is now a book and a blog

Library Juice 2:37 Supplement - September 22, 1999 ALA Council debates the question of political involvement .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1999 17:01:58 -0500 From: "James B. Casey" <jimcasey[at]lib.oak-lawn.il.us> To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> Subject: Giving Ammo to FFL Accusations of Bias. The crew from "Family Friendly Libraries" is promoting its own Conference in Cincinnati. (ALA refused to go there in 1995. So the FFL has moved into the void that we left.) The FFL home page: http://www.fflibraries.org/ Among the arguments they put about as to "What is Wrong with ALA"? are examples of how we have taken formal stands on public policy issues not related to Libraries and Librarianship. --------------------------------------------------------------- "The ALA not only seeks to influence the field of librarianship, but their official MANUAL OF PUBLIC POLICY POSITIONS states that their membership is expected to support the ERA, the concept of a nuclear freeze, gay rights, opposition to mandatary AIDS testing, national health insurance, and minors' access to sexual resources both in and out of the library. The ALA has even publicly lobbied against the Boy Scouts' policy of not allowing homosexuals to be Scout Masters." ----------------------------------------------------------- In departing from Library and Intellectual Freedom issues and adopting a positions which imply bias on "culture wars" issues, (and in collection development, etc.?) ALA has opened itself up to this kind of accusation by FFL, Dr. Laura, and others of that ilk. The attacks are not convincing to me, but what does the average citizen think about ALA's real commitment to Intellectual Freedom? If ALA is seen to be biased to the extent of taking formal stands on the "culture wars" and public policy issues of the day, how can our arguments espousing openness to all viewpoints be accepted without suspicion? Let's get back to Library and Intellectual Freedom issues in ALA Council! James B. Casey -- Councilor-at-Large .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1999 18:20:51 -0400 To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> From: "Karen G. Schneider" <kgs[at]bluehighways.com> Subject: Re: Giving Ammo to FFL Accusations of Bias. My perspective on FFL is that we shouldn't tailor ALA policy to meet their standards. Where would it end? Should we form an FFL focus group and see how they will react to proposed resolutions? FFL got its start when it fought the inclusion of the Washington Blade, a gay paper, in Virginia libraries. Should we have backed off from that fight because it was a gay paper? FFL also criticizes gay librarians for marching in gay rights parades. Shall we pass a rule that this must cease and desist? Let's stay away from the slippery slope of letting censorship groups drive our agenda. FFL will always take our policies out of context. That's a fine old tactic and we see that done all the time by other groups. Fortunately for all of us, many of FFL's website diatribes are offputting enough for any decent person. Many, many professional organizations take human rights positions as a way to support their own members. Jim, as a gay librarian, I do think that the very least my professional association can do is insure that the organizations we work with do not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation--and if they do, we need to tell them, very clearly, that this is not appropriate. Remember, the resolution didn't sever the relation with the Boy Scouts; it just made it clear to BSA how we felt. If they were discriminating on the basis of gender or color, you wouldn't be continually raising the Boy Scouts as an example of ALA extremism. (Although this brings to mind that many professional organizations, including labor unions, have in the past used their white male privilege to exclude women and people of color, as well as gay people.) You are certainly welcome to create a resolution that rescinds ALA's support for gay rights. Just be sure to make it broad enough to include all the other groups specified in the policy manual. As for FFL filling the void in Cincinatti--no, I won't say that. ;-) ________________________________________________ Karen G. Schneider kgs[at]bluehighways.com, she_schne[at]sals.edu http://www.bluehighways.com Assistant Director of Technology, Shenendehowa Public Library, NY Author: A Practical Guide to Internet Filters, Neal Schuman, 1997 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Wed, 08 Sep 1999 19:18:58 -0500 From: "S.Michael Malinconico" <mmalinco[at]slis.ua.edu> Organization: University of Alabama, School of Library & Information Studies X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> Subject: Re: Giving Ammo to FFL Accusations of Bias. Reply-To: mmalinco[at]slis.ua.edu Sender: owner-alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org Isn't bias against our own members an ALA issue? Are professional organizations not part of society? Shouldn't members of a society be appalled at injustice and act to prevent it? Or are organizations fora where their members can strut and make unctuous, high sounding statements while remaining oblivious to the world in which they exist? Whenever ALA chooses a conference site by definition it foregoes numerous other alternatives. So if the FFL had chosen to have its conference in a box canyon in Wyoming, it would have in that instance filled a void that we left. So what? -- S.Michael Malinconico School of Library and Information Studies The University of Alabama Box 870252 Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0252 "But to live outside the law you must be honest." R.Zimmerman .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 11:39:41 -0400 To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> From: mark rosenzweig <iskra[at]earthlink.net> Subject: Re: "On the Side of the Angels"? At 4:43 PM -0500 9/10/99, James B. Casey wrote: >So, by Councilor Rosenzweig's estimation, "they" are >wrong and tyranical and unjust and "we" are right and >good and just. Others might say the same thing from >an entirely different perspective. > >That is the essense of Culture Wars. Nobody ever >wins and everybody is "on the side of the Angels." > >James B. Casey -- Councilor-at-Large And where are you, Councilor Casey? What celestial platform do you occupy? What do you say about the claims of Family Friendly Libraries and their related organizations? Or is it not your business "as a librarian" to answer the FFL when it tries to turn libraries into the kind of targets womens' health clinics have been for enemies of a democratic and pluralist society. Do you feel there's something to the FFL charges that homosexual pedophiles and perverts are using our libraries to corrupt our youth? Well? What if they claimed Jews were demonic manipulators of world affairs, or blacks subhuman, or women constitutionally inferior and subordinate? You would be "agnostic" in relation to the truthfulness of all such claims? Or do you believe, for example, that the teaching of evolution is no different than the teaching of "creationism" in public schools? What about the world being flat? The librarian has no opinion. He's not going to pretend to be on the "side of the angels" by saying, to the best of his knowledge, the world is not flat. "Culture Wars", my foot! This is about ALA being an advocate for democracy, rather than being neutral about whether democracy and democratic institutions (like public libraries) are under attack. I believe librarianship will have widespread public support if it's seen - yes,advertised, promoted - as the front-line bastion of democratic values, equal access and informed choices. That is what we represent at our best. The public will side with democracy and pluralism: if not, American society will be transformed in ways which will make a lot of us ashamed to be citizens of what once was a democratic republic. Mark Rosenzweig .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 10:52:13 -0500 To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> From: Al Kagan <akagan[at]uiuc.edu> Subject: Re: FWD:"Giving Ammo to FFL Accusations of Bias". Jim Casey has stated one idea of what a professional organization ought to be. Here is another. Professional bodies have a role to play within society. They should take decisions and advocate positions to make society better based upon their expertise. As librarians, we deal very explicitly with a whole range of issues related to freedom of expression, promoting of education, cultural programming, etc. As intellectuals, we also deal with widely societal issues that the body wants to discuss. Our role in Council is to discuss whatever the members and constituent bodies want to discuss, as well as put forward our own agendas and opinions. We should work to implement our agenda within society, but we should not make decisions based on public opinion like President Clinton. We can sometimes make compromises to be more effective in our work, but we can't let anyone else determine our agendas. If we are really professionals we have a responsibility to wiegh in on important issues. Personally, I could care less what the FFL think of what we do. They are a small right-wing group and will never agree with our basic principles. Al Kagan Africana Unit, Room 328 University of Illinois Library 1408 W. Gregory Drive Urbana, IL 61801, USA tel. 217-333-6519 fax. 217-333-2214 e-mail. akagan[at]uiuc.edu .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Thu, 9 Sep 1999 16:39:47 -0400 To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> From: Mark Rosenzweig <iskra[at]earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Neutrality vs. Activism? is that the Only Choice? Jim Casey would have us dis-encumber ourselves from our history and our responsibilities as we have elaborated them over time, and allow the Family Friendly Libraries group and Dr Laura Schlesinger to set the agenda of the association. Our policies embody, among other things , over thirty years of democratically arrived at commitments and positions on various social issues which we as librarians felt strongly about AND which we saw as implicit in the values that were embodied (or which we felt should be embodied) in librarianship as a profession. Take Civil Rights. Did we have to have a position on that? Damn straight, and we had quite a struggle in ALA over the question of segregated libraries, too. People called that an "extraneous social issue". We're are opposed to all forms of discrimination and that entiails, more positively, support for civil rights, womens equality, gay rights etc. That's a social position and its concrete entailments. We're in favor of the right to education and culture for all. That's a social issue position, too. We're pro-choice. How could we not be when choice is what good libarianship is meant to make possible? And so on. These positions have progresively been made explicit as we develop the implicit values of librarianship in the real world, a world which we have --I believe, and hope many of you believe-- a commitment to making a better place. Or is that, too, an unacceptable social commitment? The very question which Family Friendly Libraries was founded to fight against, childrens right to information, is a fundamental social/cultural conviction of our association and our profession. Should we back down on this because it too is partisan social commitment? If so why not let the censors remove the books from the shelves. That will satisfy them and make life easier for us. We won't have to worry any more about justifying our partisanship for freedom,equality and access. Mark Rosenzweig .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. From: "Christine Lind Hage" <hagec[at]metronet.lib.mi.us> To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> Subject: FFL Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 06:04:28 -0400 I believe that Council should take stands on social issues as they relate to libraries. Mark Rosenzweig's comments about segregation gives a perfect example. As an organization we should not be chastising a group about social issues except when they are related to libraries. The FFL folks are impacting libraries. I really appreciate Bill Gordon's brief comment the other day about suggestions for handling picketers of the library. Granted it was very basic, but believe me, many of our colleagues are so busy handling day to day problems that they don't have the time or energy to join discussions like this on FFL. On the other hand, they will have no choice, but to react on September 18th, if the picketing comes to be. Even more challenging for public libraries is that if the picketing does occur on that day, most libraries are shorter staffed on Saturdays. Most directors don't work on Saturdays. This means that the ALA heads up gives good warning to folks to plan a course of action in case the picketers appear. Bill's message was forwarded to many listservs. Many folks who aren't members of ALA will receive the information and this is a small example of how ALA can help all libraries, not just members of the association. Bill's message came in response to FFL, but is not directed to them. We're not telling them what to do. We're not setting big ALA policies. We're merely offering advice to libraries nationwide. The libraries can choose to act, react or to do nothing. ALA is only being helpful and that's what libraries are all about. Helping people get the right information, at the right time, in right format. Christine Lind Hage ALA Councilor at Large Director, Clinton-Macomb Public Library 43245 Garfield Road Clinton Township, MI 48038-1115 USA .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 07:23:50 -0400 To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> From: "Karen G. Schneider" <kgs[at]bluehighways.com> Subject: Re: FFL At 06:04 AM 9/10/99 -0400, Christine Lind Hage wrote: >I believe that Council should take stands on social issues as they relate to >libraries. Mark Rosenzweig's comments about segregation gives a perfect >example. As an organization we should not be chastising a group about >social issues except when they are related to libraries. Christine captured many good points (including how important it was for someone with the stature of Bill Gordon to quickly respond to a request for assistance. ALA gained many style points for that action, which was immensely calming to librarians everywhere). One area we on Council are not in agreement on is how far our policies go--whether our policies are about libraries, or whether we include librarians, or whether we expand to a more global view. I take the middle road--that the individual welfare of librarians is our responsibility. The Boy Scout resolution gets exhumed by some as an example of ALA policy gone over the top, but as a professional organization, we represent many individuals who in most cases have no other group to advocate for them. Asking the BSA to reconsider its policy--which we did politely--was in keeping with our responsibility as a professional organization. We should not be ashamed to care enough about our members to ask a group we have a close relationship with to stop discriminating against one group. We should certainly not abandon our policies when one extremist group singles us out for criticism. When we are sniped about any one policy, Boy Scouts or otherwise, we should respond with these comments, and we should point with pride to the long history of ALA's commitment to our members. We owe it to our constituents. If not one library had ever been segregated, it would still have been appropriate for ALA to take a position against segregation, due to our corporate responsibility to librarians everywhere. Those of you who were around for the ERA can probably remember arguments that ALA shouldn't get bogged down with "women's issues" unrelated to librarianship. As long as there are women in librarianship--and people of color, and gay men and lesbians, and those who are differently abled, and so forth--these issues are our issues. ________________________________________________ Karen G. Schneider kgs[at]bluehighways.com, she_schne[at]sals.edu http://www.bluehighways.com Assistant Director of Technology, Shenendehowa Public Library, NY Author: A Practical Guide to Internet Filters, Neal Schuman, 1997 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 08:30:48 -0500 From: "James B. Casey" <jimcasey[at]lib.oak-lawn.il.us> To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> Subject: It isn't FFL, but the Mirror which needs our attention. Al Kagan wrote (excerpt): "If we are really professionals we have a responsibility to wiegh in on important issues. Personally, I could care less what the FFL think of what we do. They are a small right- wing group and will never agree with our basic principles." ----------------------------------------------- What FFL thinks of ALA isn't really very important. After all, FFL has its own set of hypocrisies and blasts forth its own brand of self-defeating rhetoric. Dr. Laura and FFL really aren't worth much of ALA's attention, let alone a counter-attack. What does matter, however, is how ALA is viewed by the library community as a whole, the population as a whole, and by decision makers in Washington and the state capitals. Our ability to work on behalf of Libraries and Librarianship is compromised if our Intellectual Freedom positions are vulnerable to charges of hypocrisy. That FFL should take advantage of that weakness in the integrity of ALA's Intellectual Freedom stand isn't terribly surprising. After all, they don't like us much and would like to see our cause defeated at every turn. If Librarians are said to be biased on many of the crucial issues of our day "because, after all, the national association representing libraries and librarianship, has formally endorsed X and Y, and condemned Z", how can we expect librarians not to bring their biases into collection development decisions and into judgments relative to what our children see, hear and do at the Library? As human beings, we may have a very important responsibility to "weigh in" on the important issues of the day. As Librarians, we may have a far more important responsibility to stand for open access to information for all people. Our credibility as Librarians is compromised if ALA (our national organization) is inclined to formally endorse or condemn ideas and philosophies which exist in society. James B. Casey -- Councilor-at-Large .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. From: Oliver[at]jcl.lib.ks.us To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> Subject: Jim Casey's Comments and Public Perception Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 09:16:35 -0500 Dear Colleagues, I greatly appreciated Jim Casey's comments regarding FFL and the public's perception of ALA/libraries. As a profession one of the things it is essential we continue to do is reflect the needs of our communities and constituencies, even their values. I am becoming increasingly troubled and disenchanted with the way some of our membership have taken hard-line stands on many issues without the courtesy of weighing the merits of other viewpoints. Throughout my professional career I have been an IF member and supporter. I believe in the values of intellectual freedom. Along with those values we must be willing to consider all points of view and how it impacts library service. We must also determine and realistically strategize at all levels as to how we survive as a politically viable association and maintain those values. Unfortunately, I am beginning to tune out 95% of what is said on the IF listserve because it is rancorous, politically naive, petty and hurtful. In other words, it isn't separating us from the bad guys by very much. Kent Oliver Kansas Chapter Councilor Kent Oliver Branch Services Manager Johnson County Library oliver[at]jcl.lib.ks.us "Don't Get It: Confusion caused by limited resources in the space starting above the shoulders." Rich Dauer, K.C. Royals Coach .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 14:53:52 -0400 To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> From: Mark Rosenzweig <iskra[at]earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Jim Casey's Comments and Public Perception With all due respect I have to say that I am somewhat concerned and disturbed by some implications of Councilor Kent Oliver's comments. Family Friendly Libraries is, among other things, a fiercely, publicly active homophobic group: i.e. a "hate group".This is npot something one has to probe deeply to discover. It is not the democratic voice of our communities, but is closely linked to the organized, national efforts of the anti-democratic/theocratic Right, which seeks, often disingenuously, to impose its agenda through many such operations on our public institutions and our private lives. FFL, for example, believes there is a homosexual conspiracy to pervert children in schools and libraries, a conspiracy which they are exposing and challenging. It is one thing to collect materials of the FFL group and make it available in our libraries along with everything else, much as we do with so-called creationism, but is another to seem to endorse the equal validity of the their views and programs. We have an obligation to document the FFL within the parameters of our individual collection policies, we have a responsibility to make such material accessible. We do not have a responsibility to pretend that we (the ALA, in particular and those librarians/libraries which endorse the ALA) support in any way the validity of their agendas with respect to libraries. The FFL is part of a very extensive network of anti-democratic/theocratic groups which want to remake America and its institutions based on the program of wresting power under whatever pretenses from those who want to maintain the Bill of Rights as the COnstitution as the basis of our civil society. They seek instead to impose so-called "biblical" values (like hatred of homosexuals, refusal of choice to women, prayer in schools, advocacy of school curriculum based on creationism,etc). We stand, I hope, as an association, squarely in defense of a pluralistic society and a public sphere based on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, not on a society based on supposedly theocratic principles, on hatred, divisiveness, and supression or refusal of others' rights to choose options freely. As a self-described lifelong IF supporter Kent Oliver should be less concerned with the disputatiousness on the IF listserv and its cacophony of voices, no matter how rancorous, than with those who would impose an agenda of hate,exclusion and sectariansim on our public instiututions and change the democratic American way of life. To stand for a basis of libraries in fundamental Constitutional values is not to exclude or supress the voices of right-wing organizations, but neither is it to endorse their sectarian agenda as equally valid. Yes it is "taking a position",and should be based on carefully weighing the character of the opposed viewpoint, but, after due consideration of FFL, ours is a position implied by our acceptance of the US Constitution, the ALA Code of EThics, The Library Bill of Rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (which we have endorsed) and many of the well-thought-through policies of ALA, as well as any coherent notion of professional responsibilities and standards. Mark Rosenzweig councilor at large .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 16:43:46 -0500 From: "James B. Casey" <jimcasey[at]lib.oak-lawn.il.us> To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> Subject: "On the Side of the Angels"? So, by Councilor Rosenzweig's estimation, "they" are wrong and tyranical and unjust and "we" are right and good and just. Others might say the same thing from an entirely different perspective. That is the essense of Culture Wars. Nobody ever wins and everybody is "on the side of the Angels." James B. Casey -- Councilor-at-Large .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 17:34:42 -0700 To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> From: Druthgo[at]sonic.net (Dr. Ruth I. Gordon) Subject: F Unfriendly L. Reply-To: Druthgo[at]sonic.net Sender: owner-alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org Colleagues and other shut-ins: I personally do not give a fig for what Dr. L. , Mr. Burt, and FFL wish to spread about ALA--or me personally. I will continue to chip away at the expenditure of any $'s ALA, and by extension, one of my divisions, ALSC, expends to support Boy Scouts of America. I believe that we, as librarians, serve the person (i.e., boy, girl, puppy), not the organization, i.e., BSA, Inc., but FFL, Dr. L., Mr. Burt, et alii ad naus. simply refuse to see the difference--as do too many who write to this list and are also councilors. I REPEAT; We serve the person. We do not serve BSA, Inc., and if we contribute to it in any way, I will continue to insist on a clean divorce--not friendly--just clean. Does the ALSC Councilor have any information that might enlighten my ignorance about any expenditure that somehow is utilized by BSA, Inc. in its expensive little Merit Badge Booklets (which we, in libraries, must buy since rich old BSA, Inc. doesn't contribute any to libraries. Of course, it is true, that occasionally, when under fire, BSA, Inc., does contribute plastic plaques that look like bronze, to organizations like ALSC.) Big Grandma, C-at-L ================== "You may not be able to change the world, but at least you can embarrass the guilty." Jessica Mitford (1917-1996) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 18:29:07 -0400 To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org>g> From: Mark Rosenzweig <iskra[at]earthlink.net> Subject: Reply to James Casey Jim Casey wrote: >Councilor Rosenzweig: ... ...identifying groups of >people who disagree with us as "enemies of a >democratic and pluralistic society" isn't terribly >helpful in our quest to further the cause of >Intellectual Freedom. > >Do you believe that the ACLU is weak or evil >because it defends the rights of American Nazis >and Klan supporters to demonstrate? I would >like to know what you think of the ACLU. > >Jim Casey -- Councilor-at-Large > Dear Jim, In answer to your question.: I support the ACLU. The ACLU has no problem calling a Nazi a Nazi.They have a clear understanding, and no trouble expressing it, of who's who. On the other hand, it doesn't interfere with their work - on the contrary - for them to accurately represent themselves as partisans of freedom against the enemies of pluralism and democracy. They know that's what makes their work so important. It obviously doesn't, in any way, prevent them from asserting and defending the constitutional rights of those who disagree with them about constitutional rights and intellectual freedom when their rights are not respected under law. Having a clear understanding of the FFL would in no way prevent librarians from collecting and making available their materials. Nor would we have any trouble providing reference or other services to their members. That doesn't mean we have to make concessions to FFL or any such group about librarianship and its practice, misrepresent the character and purpose of their organization, or buy into any attempt to allow them to cast themselves as the "real" voice of our communities! Our commitments are represented clearly in our ALA policies especially, but not restricted to, the social and cultural value of intellectual freedom. We have a right to be proud of those policies, including our commitments to human rights and other such (as you would have them) "culture war" values. The FFL has their commitments, which are to oppose our positions. That is their right. It certainly doesn't mean we are obliged to somehow bridge the gap and come to some agreeement with them! In other words, we shouldn't jettison, as you seem to be implying, 30 years of ALA's social/cultural commitments, to better accomodate a group like Family Friendly Libraries or a Dr Laura Schlesinger. Mark Rosenzweig .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 08:14:04 -0500 From: "James B. Casey" <jimcasey[at]lib.oak-lawn.il.us> To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> Subject: Re: Reply to James Casey Does ACLU take formal positions on issues such as abortion, ERA, Gay Rights, nuclear power, or other public policy issues or is their focus on Intellectual Freedom? ACLU is taken very seriously by the public and by decision makers in Washington -- ACLU rates the various Congressional leaders (ALMANAC OF AMERICAN POLITICS, 2000) based upon their support for Intellectual Freedom issues. If ALA were to "rate" various Congressional leaders, would our rating be based upon support for Library and Intellectual Freedom issues alone or would it have to include the gamut of causes from abortion to ERA to Gay Rights to nuclear power to abortion rights to etc. which ALA has embraced? What if a Congressperson was to vote that any abortion was a sin and that Homosexuality was sinful, but vote against filtering and in favor of improved LSTA funding? American LIBRARY Association should stick to LIBRARY issues rather than expending our political capital on an array of unrelated causes and thus exposing its Intellectual Freedom stands to charges of hypocrisy and bias. James B. Casey -- Councilor-at-Large .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 23:11:56 -0400 From: Rita Auerbach <ritaauerbach[at]earthlink.net> To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> Subject: Re: Reply to James Casey Jim Casey asked: Does ACLU take formal positions on issues such as abortion, ERA, Gay Rights, nuclear power, or other public policy issues or is their focus on Intellectual Freedom? Although the ACLU was formed to defend First Amendment rights, it has evolved into a defender of all rights with a Bill of Rights or 14th Amendment (equal protection) basis. From Jim's list, the CLU supported the ERA, and currently has active programs supporting gay rights and the right to choose. Among its many other issues are police brutality and voting rights. As a professional organization of librarians and libraries, our primary focus is certainly on information issues. It behooves us also to be concerned about social issues which affect our, and our clients', rights of free expression and many of the items on Jim's list are clearly related to these concerns. Rita Auerbach .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:28:31 -0500 From: "James B. Casey" <jimcasey[at]lib.oak-lawn.il.us> To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]ala1.ala.org> Subject: Who is Right about Rights? Al Kagan wrote (excerpt): "Our principles should included [sic] human rights for all, however that needs to be construed. If people who do not believe in the Bill of Rights or decisions by the Supreme Court don't like it, it is their problem." ----------------------------------------------------- Do ALA principles include human rights for all? Do our principles include the "right to life" for unborn infants? Do our principles include the right to own firearms for all who can afford them? Do our principles include the right to "prayer in schools"? Do our principles include the right of people to believe that homosexuality is sinful and/or anti-social behavior and act to prevent their children from contact with Gays in school or elsewhere? Do our principles include the right of people to choose the schools their youngsters will attend and receive vouchers to pay tuition if the schools do not happen to be publically supported? Do our principles include the "right to work" regardless of union regulations? Do our principles include the right of people not to pay their taxes [expecially when taxes support most of our libraries] if they feel that the Government is unjust or repressive? Do our principles include the right of schools and libraries to have text books which teach "creationism" and discount evolution theories on the shelves? For large elements of our society, these "causes" represent what they believe to be a struggle for basic human rights -- "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." I would say that ALA has not taken stands in defense of these particular human rights causes, but has sometimes taken stands which run counter to them --- such as abortion rights (pro choice). That ALA has been selective in terms of the human rights causes which it has chosen to embrace is a matter of record. That the causes which ALA has formally supported are consistently and demonstrably on the "liberal" or "left" or "secular humanist" side of the Culture Wars is also clear. ALA is saying, in effect, that some human rights causes and perspectives are more worthy than others. Although I personally agree with practically all of the non-library social positions ALA has taken, I am aware that there are vast segments of our service populations who look at things from an entirely different perspective. The "conservative" or "right" or "religious traditionalists" are not just a "Christian Right" any longer but increasingly fundamentalist in terms of the Islamic faith, for example. Taking sides in the "culture wars" has compromised the integrity of ALA's Intellectual Freedom stands by casting doubt upon our openness to all ideas and perspectives. James B. Casey --- Councilor-at-Large _____________________________________________________________________________ Some of the messages in the above debate were forwarded to the lists SRRT-AC and PLGnet-L. The following is a response sent to these lists. From: DENWALL[at]aol.com Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 01:08:14 EDT Subject: Pass the Ammunition CC: plgnet-l[at]listproc.sjsu.edu, srrtac-l[at]ala.org, DENWALL[at]aol.com If one looked at things in a "purely" logical way, what Casey said might make some kind of sense. Except it has no relation to the real world at hand in modern times. The other night I was watching the Charlie Rose show and he was conversing with a group of technology big-names who were attending a big conference in San Jose. Just about all they chose to talk about in an attempt to identify the big questions to be resolved as technology develops was the issue of privacy protection. One participant, for example, felt the wave of the future was to get consumers to believe that they could choose to entrust their personal data--the staff that e-commerce types lust after--to online "guardians" i.e. you could decide what info you wanted to get about what topics and security would be such that no one else could snatch the data for unauthorized uses. Yeh, sure. Sounds like "fail-safe" atomic energy, right? Anyway, the CEO for SUN was very worried about invasion of privacy issues and felt technology was no where near knowing how to make data invulnerable to unauthorized use. I relate this to make the point that NOBODY in the information retreival-dissemination business can be neutral on such issues as privacy, 1st amendment rights, etc. That is because we will all have to play a part in influencing the direction that all the ongoing revolutions in communications media will take and monitoring the implications of the choices made for our personal freedoms and the health of free exchange of ideas in our society. Why is it so sexy for technology CEO's to talk civil liberties yet so reprehensible for librarians to do the same? Subtle status perks??? This reminds me of when my two mixed race children were in public schools and would be harrassed by racial epithets. I would go very calmly to the principal and suggest that maybe a committee might be formed to monitor the hate quotient in the atmosphere at the school and I would be told that it was best not to stir up the muddy waters, i.e. if you just don't talk about "it" (racism) "it" would go away. So Casy thinks that if we just don't talk about the issues Dr. Laura is hot and bothered about she will go away????? {Not anytime soon.....she's having too much fun} Pat Wallace Austin, Texas denwall [at] aol.com _____________________________________________________________________________ L I B R A R Y J U I C E | http://libr.org/Juice/ | | Original material and added value in Library Juice | is copyright-free; beyond that the publisher makes | no guarantees. Library Juice is a free weekly | publication edited and published by Rory Litwin. | Original senders are credited wherever possible; | opinions are theirs. Your comments and suggestions | are welcome. Juice[at]libr.org This page was created by SimpleText2Html 1.0.3 on 21-Sep-99.