Posted on 11/15/2005 6:27:47 AM PST by A. Pole
Barred 'biblical marriage' forum unless it included 'opposing view'
An Ohio library dropped a policy that barred a public interest group from holding a forum on traditional marriage without also inviting someone to argue for "same-sex marriage."
The agreement by the Newton Falls Library Board of Trustees settled a lawsuit filed by Florida-based Liberty Counsel, which applied to the library to hold a meeting last spring that would include prayer and Scripture reading.
The library denied Liberty Counsel's application, citing a policy that said, "If a program deals with a controversial subject, then all sides of the issue must be presented."
The policy made the room available to "nonprofit organizations" for "programs of a civic, cultural or educational nature."
Liberty Counsel said it requested the room for specific dates at the end of May and on June 6 or 13, but library director Kerry McCrone denied the application May 23.
Along with notice of the denial, McCrone sent a copy of the policy, highlighting the statement that if a program deals with a controversial subject, all sides of the issue must be presented.
With the settlement, the library has agreed to remove the requirement.
Mathew D. Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty Counsel, said the old policy violated the First Amendment's right of free speech.
"Under the former policy, Liberty Counsel would have been required to invite a proponent of same-sex marriage before we could address our viewpoint that marriage is the union of one man and one woman," he said. "Such a policy invites dispute and ends up censoring the speaker."
I wonder how many books published by Regnery this library has on its shelves? And how many of the copies of the Toons' books it has available?
What a silly rule. Would it have meant the local chapter of the NAACP would be required to invite a few Klansmen to their meeting, in this false quest for some sort of balance?
"Controversial" speech bump!
Excellent point. This "fairness" nonsense is just the standard "political correctness". Of course conservatives must be "balanced" but liberal thought? Well that's just mainstream... or so the braying goes.
Who would they all invite to a symposium about the War on Terror?
These fools also do not understand the implications of "all sides." If you want to have all sides describing marriage, you would also have to include polygamists, arranged marriage advocates, "free love" types, those who insist that marriage is bondage, those who are turned on by the idea of bondage without marriage, those who believe that limiting marriage to humans is "speciesist", etc. etc. etc.
One last thing, who gets to pick the "opposing views?" Nothing stops people from inviting "straw men" (poor representatives of a position" or even "ringers: and "shills" (those who pretend to advocate a position, and purposely botch the presentation. I used to belong to such a group in my long, gone college days... People for Progress!
Would they invite NAMBLA for a conference on child predators? Michael Jackson?
Personally, I think some of these people need a good old fashioned tarring and feathering, or at the least, a kick in the face with steel toed boots... and I'm not being sarcastic...
Oh, they understand alright. They are just simpletons following like robots to the beat of Anti-America.
Toons? Like looney toons?
How did these nitwits on the library board intend to handle an issue with a vitually infinite number of sides or points of view?
what is/are the 'Toons'? I did a search got nothing but Cartoons.
clin - Toons......ie the clintons
ooh duh! thank you
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.