A City Banned Pride Month–Themed Library Displays. Then It Threatened Employees Who Criticized the Decision.
After officials in Orem, Utah, banned “heritage month” displays in the public library, it threatened to discipline librarians who criticized the censorship.

City officials in Orem, Utah, have banned its public library from setting up displays highlighting Pride Month, Black History Month, and Hispanic Heritage Month, along with other heritage-themed holidays. And then they banned librarians from criticizing the city's decision—threatening to discipline them for "insubordination."
But now, the Utah Library Association (ULA) has threatened to sue, teaming up with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a First Amendment nonprofit, to warn the city that it could soon face a lawsuit for violating librarians' First Amendment rights.
In June 2022, Orem city officials banned the Orem Public Library from setting up any Pride Month–themed displays in the library's children or teen sections, prompting backlash from the ULA, which called on the city to reverse the ban. Instead, the city enacted further bans, prohibiting the library from making any heritage month–themed displays—including Black History Month, Hispanic Heritage Month, and Native American History Month–themed book displays. Notably, this ban did not apply to other holiday-themed displays, such as Christmas or the Fourth of July.
Again, the ULA criticized the decision, posting a statement on social media and its website arguing that "This act of censorship is not only a disservice to the Orem community, but also an act of overreach by the city government….The library is both a legal and a symbolic embodiment of the fundamental American value that we all have the right to self-direct, think for ourselves, read, learn, and engage with ideas and information without government interference."
In response, the city has retaliated, cutting off library employees from ULA-affiliated professional development programs. Making matters worse, the city outright threatened library employees with discipline if they criticized city officials' censorship of heritage month–themed displays. According to FIRE, when news of the ban went public, city officials even "conducted a lengthy inquisition among the library staff interrogating them to try to figure out who spoke to a former employee about the policy." Eventually, they "reprimanded one employee and forced them to forgo a raise."
The Orem Public Library also subjects employees to a restrictive social media policy that bars employees from "mak[ing] disparaging comments about the workplace, City policies, supervisors, co-workers, citizens, customers, or other persons associated with the City," as well as prohibits "post[ing] any information to any blog, social networking site, or other public internet site, that would discredit or disparage the City." In an email to library employees, one former library director pointed out this policy, as well as informing employees "that membership in the Utah Valley Parent's Alliance, which opposed the display ban, would also be considered insubordination," according to FIRE.
But FIRE contends that these actions clearly violate the First Amendment. "The City of Orem's actions violate the First Amendment rights of both the ULA and Orem employees," FIRE attorney Gabe Walters said in a press release last Friday. "The city may not retaliate against employees for exercising their constitutionally protected rights of free speech and free association."
FIRE sent a letter to Orem city officials last Friday, informing them that their actions violate the Constitution and threatening to sue if the city doesn't change course. FIRE's letter singles out both the city's explicitly retaliatory conduct in cutting off support for employee association with the ULA and its social media policy. According to FIRE, the social media policy stifles employees' First Amendment rights by placing a prior restraint on librarians' speech. The policy is also overly broad and unconstitutionally vague.
"For instance, an employee risks discipline if she posts on Facebook complaining about excess traffic or criticizing something the Mayor said to the City Council, speech with little to no bearing on the operation of the Orem Public," the letter notes, adding that the policy's vagueness leaves it unclear if employees violate the policy merely by disagreeing with the ban or by posting in agreement with the ULA's criticism of the ban. "This vagueness opens the door for 'arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement' where employees are punished only for speech that City leadership dislikes or finds challenging."
FIRE has given city officials until June 30 to change their policies—or face a lawsuit.
"Librarians should be able to do their jobs rather than be forced to tiptoe through the minefield of councilmembers' preferred political positions," said Rita Christensen, a former Orem Public Library employee. "City leaders forced us to trade exploration and learning for government restrictions and intimidation. And if we spoke out about their decisions, we'd be severely disciplined, labeled as untrustworthy, and treated like a pariah."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Hmm, does this mean I can say and do anything I want in my workplace?
Try being anti-BLM or anti-trans.
Correct - their blatant political silencing of criticism of these groups is anti-American.
Of course you can.
I always said "my last day working here will be GLORIOUS !!!"
Was about to ask. Does the city let any other activist group place paraphernalia on public property? Did Emma learn nothing of Satanists and public property?
Emma is an idiot who thinks Utah banning Pride indoctrination is a topic to be breathlessly covered, but the specialization of kids is NBD huh?
Setting up a display is not "indoctrination", you tool. Looking at it doesn't force you to be gay. If you don't like it, look away.
And when your Marxist teacher demands you look at it?
Stop lying about everything.
This goes way beyond their behavior at work.
And if we spoke out about their decisions, we'd be severely disciplined, labeled as untrustworthy, and treated like a pariah."
Said the person who no doubt supported Covid “protocols “.
So, properly cancelled?
Welcome to your world.
Same thought - after living through the 2020 BLM Scam and COVID-19 scam, we know the Lying Leftists will use state power to silence critics.
Who was the public-relations genius who advocated extending the ban to “Black History Month, Hispanic Heritage Month, and Native American History Month”? That simply gives aid and comfort to those who want to lump the alphabet soup together with other groups more worthy of commemoration.
Was it the same geniuses who risked judicial reprisal for overbroad speech policies?
It is called consistent policy. If you want all those other groups you have to allow Nazis and others space as well.
Was it the same geniuses who risked judicial reprisal for overbroad speech policies?
Remember, you're getting 100% pure, solid-gold, plaintiff's attorney's bullshit here.
As usual with Reason's unadulterated bullshit. There is no "ban". The library cut the number of Pride displays from several to one and moved it to the adult section. The others were handled similarly specifically reserving larger displays for federally-observed holidays.
Emma is an idiot of the first-degree breathlessly covering the supposed ban, which is another Lefty Lie. There is no ban on the prize displays in Utah. It was reduced to one display and move to a different section. Notice how the left lies because the truth is not on their side.
>>violating librarians' First Amendment rights.
at a city job.
From the way it's written, it sounds like it applies off the job too.
But only in the same way I'd be reprimanded or fired for calling my company a shithole to work and actively and publicly disparaging my boss.
A company is not a government agency. You don't give up your 1A rights to "mak[ing] disparaging comments about the workplace, City policies, supervisors, co-workers, citizens, customers, or other persons associated with the City," as well as prohibits "post[ing] any information to any blog, social networking site, or other public internet site, that would discredit or disparage the City" because of your job.
Whether you work for a government agency or a private company, interpreting the as a 1A right to disparage your co-workers or a right to get a raise after disparaging your boss is overly broad as well.
Also, anymore, selective interpretation/celebratory parallax bullshit is causing “overly broad” to become meaningless nonsense as well. A nurse can get suspended for getting harassed for renting a bike and using the word ‘nigger’ in a self-referencing or non-racial sense while smoking with a fellow cop out behind the police station will automatically get you booted, but flat out saying you’ll violate the Constitution, in direct contradiction to your sworn oath of public office, refuse to do your job, facilitate lawlessness, and sexualize children against their parents wishes is protected speech? Fuck that “overly broad” bullshit. Plenty of asshats out there for whom “Shall not be infringed.” is overly broad too.
As much as I'm sick of all these heritage months, I have to say the city government jumped the shark here and deserves to be slapped down.
Do they?
If your rule has brought you to this place, of what use was it?
Yes they do. It is possible to be for/against something and independently be against/for the rules which allowed this to happen. Allowing only BLM/Antifa/YayCOVID/etc. displays doesn't mean the only solution is to ban only those displays. A better solution to such displays might be to look at the underlying rules which allowed it in the first place. Free speech is free speech for everyone. If it isn't, then at some point your speech is going to cost you, and it will cost you dearly.
Maybe instead of reflexively assuming a position for or against based on a personal opinion of someone, read what is posted first and see where your position lies without knowing who advocated it .
I would be OK with this if there was any display from conservatives, or they were even allowed to read a conservative booking in the library for story hour, but because of the progressive social constructionist theories of the left, they will not even allowed dissenting opinions to be expressed in a public space. So screw their fairness - ban that shit.
Agreed. I could completely do without all the national so-and-so days and months, but not through these kinds of heavy handed government actions.
Except there are already heavy-handed government actions from the Left - wake up! Do you not remember the DOJ and the FBI colluding with the teachers unions and other institutions just very recently?!
Libraries are destined for the dustbin of history. Libraries were where information was stored and could be easily accessed by ordinary people and researchers. Now that function has been taken over by the internet and libraries have become little more than state financed political activists.
This sounds plausible, but that information resource you speak of, the internet, is massively manipulated, the manipulation being funded by various state and non-state interests.
It's not so good a resource as you posit.
Luckily, public libraries aren't run by insane leftists who choose and reject works based on their personal political beliefs. Like my library, where I had to complain to the county because they refused to carry a single book on Catholic (yuck) theology. And don't forget who instituted Drag Queen Story Hour.
Moot.
All I said was that the internet is not necessarily a reliable resource.
Go argue your strawmen in a different thread. I don't care.
These idiots want to complain that pride month is banned, but they want to shove a gun in your face if you have a problem with drag queens for children using government authority, the cops, the IRS and other government situations to punish political opponents. This is as un-American as it gets.
At least it's possible for parents to keep an eye on their children while on the internet at home and there will be no drag queen story hours. And let's not forget that the left will also call it neglect if a parent let's their child go to a public library and try and take the child away.
I would also point out that libraries manipulate information as well by deciding what books to carry. I mean how many copies of "When Harry Became Sally" do you think most libraries carry? I would bet most carry only one if any at all. At least on the internet I can go to the publisher and order directly for almost any book I want and can visit various sites to try and get a more balanced picture.
Again, it's likely far easier to not take your children to the drag queen story hour than it is to monitor all of their internet activity.
You really do have a magical sense of what the internet is. It is not the cure all for leftist propaganda you seem to think it is, and increasingly not a reliable resource for research. Take that statement at face value. I'm not saying anything else.
Again, it’s likely far easier to not take your children to the drag queen story hour than it is to monitor all of their internet activity.
Uh, varyingly, disagree. Namely, you juxtapose an action against an inaction and say the inaction is easier, which has nothing to do with the specific action/inaction. It’s likely far easier to monitor all your children’s internet activity that you facilitate than it is to follow your children around anywhere and everywhere to ensure they don’t wind up at a DQSH at the library.
Also, you pose a false dichotomy, if my local library realizes it runs off community taxes and would be stupid to put on a DQSH, then I don’t have to expend any effort to avoid one at my library.
But, of course, I'm one of those who proxies DNS lookups, sniffs packets, and monitors cell data usage. So, getting up from my chair to run the kids to the library (a distance which they can walk) is more trouble than just letting them walk (or not).
How is that a false dichotomy?
And, remember, I didn't pose it. I was answering upstream's strange response about drag queen story hours to my "the internet isn't perfect" message. Note that he also said they'd take your kids away for letting them go to the library alone, too. I just ignored that part, but that's why I said "take your children" instead if them just randomly stumbling into the tranny readings.
Here's the deal. DQSH, while it has happened, is rare. Very fucking rare, and most often done for the specific purpose raising a ruckus so the folks complaining can be called gay bashers and the folks putting them on can pretend to be victims. They get outsized media, for good reason.
Perverse things on the internet are common. Remarkably common. I mean, the internet was pretty much built on porn and kittens, it's sort of in the DNA of the modern internet for there to be boobies. If your children have ANY internet access, monitoring requires someone with your skillset whereas a substantial number of people can't even set up their own modem without help.
So, take the chance that your local library has drag queens, and the chance that, if it does, you are too ignorant to know about it -- and I wouldn't believe that for you, personally, you're not ignorant in the least -- and that kids were wrangled into it without their parents there, and you you have a whole lot of rare circumstances that need to align before they're in danger of sitting through a DQSH. So the chances are very very low that anything happens that requires any effort. Compare that to the chances to see boobies or lady dicks on the internet, a place accessible from every phone, tablet, and computer, including those belonging to your kids' friends with less restrictive parents. The internet is where folks used to email each other Goatse or tubgirl for a hilarious joke and every reddit NSFW forum just takes an "I'm 18" click. You'd have to sequester your kids until they were adults to keep them away from seeing that shit.
Yeah, I'm still gonna say most people's kids are more likely to see a drag queen on the internets.
How is that a false dichotomy?
...
I just ignored that part, but that’s why I said “take your children” instead if them just randomly stumbling into the tranny readings.
I specifically laid out how it's not a false dichotomy. You can not provide your kids internet just as, if not more easily than not driving them to the library. That the kids can find ways around both voids both the specific point (the kids are exercising their own agency while you still aren't doing anything either way) and the dichotomy (there are now, at least or categorically four options, not two).
That aside, you question how I could think it's a false dichotomy, and then proclaim you just ignored all but the two options. An action which, maybe more critically, conflated "let" with "take" in a distinctly "not giving is taking" mentality. Everyone in the story has varying degrees of agency, the parents, the kids, the neighbors the friends, the drag queens... the transformation of "I won't let..." to "I will (not) take..." to "I won't let them take..." to "I won't let them recieve..." is utter sophistry that completely detaches your last fact, even if accurate, from any underlying principles. If the kids are entirely able to go anywhere on their own and the drag queens are entirely able to find them there, any disparity between libraries and the internet is immaterial.
Now that function has been taken over by the internet
Not even close. The internet accesses a carefully curated outline of all available published information. The information available in libraries and archives dwarfs what can be accessed on the web.
I have made $18625 last month by w0rking 0nline from home in my part time only. Everybody can now get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow details here..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> https://www.Apprichs.com
Libraries have become the bastion of progressive indoctrination much like the public education in the United States of America
Just ban public libraries.
^upvote
Then where would homeless people spend their days, and where would stay-at-home moms park their children while they had wine with their friends?
Libraries are no longer needed. Their purpose has been taken over by the internet.
Maybe someday all the books and records in libraries and archives will be available on the internet. We're very far from that now.
a First Amendment nonprofit, to warn the city that it could soon face a lawsuit for violating librarians' First Amendment rights.
*rubbing temples*
You know... this-or-that kerfuffle over this-or-that display of this-or-that group's political sloganeering aside, DO public city employees, while in the city-owned space, have a right to display the symbols of ANY group they align with and not receive any sanctions whatsoever from said city?
Could the librarians, for instance, set up bible-themed... or more specifically, Christian-themed displays? What if they did Nazi-aligned themes that promoted white supremacy, or white power? Can they do a NAMBLA-related display, promoting the recognition of man-boy-love (or would that be treading on the public school's areas of specialty? *rimshot*)? Are there ANY limitations on what library employees can promote, under any circumstances whatsoever, and if so, when, why and under what circumstances?
We're not talking about a Librarian who had a personal facebook page with Pride-themed stuff, and her religious employers sanctioned her for it, we're talking about displays sanctioned by the library, on library grounds, by library employees, and promoted to library patrons.
Can they do a NAMBLA-related display, promoting the recognition of man-boy-love
Oh please, oh please, oh please
/jeff
*rubbing temples*
The “In response, … forced them to forgo a raise.” paragraph is just stupifying, absolutely stupifying. So you took action that your employer didn’t approve of and, as a result, they refused to fund your employee development program or support your employee association, which lots of employers don’t even provide or do to begin with, *and* they didn’t give you a raise? WTHF?
And you’re going to sue the City to what? Force the taxpayers to spend more money or go without a publicly funded library or fire a perfectly capable librarian in favor of a toxic shitty display librarians? They’re fucking drive-thru window operators for books for chrissakes! All the actual work at our local library is done behind the scenes (as in, without display) anyway. Maybe at the New York Public library where some mid-upper librarian is part historian, part archivist, part media manager, part supply and logistics... 'librarian' might mean something. In Orem, UT, librarian is between drive thru window operator and Amazon warehouse workers (confined to a 1/4 acre "warehouse").
I say again, Fuck FIRE. They’re like a mentally diseased millennial version of the ACLU.
FIRE is going after the library specifically for punishing off premises private communications. That is their proper role.
Support for professional activities is a perk that should be available to ‘top performers’ based on their job only. Dissing the library., even privately, could rightly be considered a harm to group morale, and should be treated as such.
Rules for Displays should be written - no political or religious groups or themes, and none that discriminate on the basis of race, sex, or nationality.
FIRE is going after the library specifically for punishing off premises private communications. That is their proper role.
No. FIRE is going after the library *allegedly* for punishing off premise private communications and provides no evidence of such. Without said evidence, it's frivolous/wrongful prosecution.
And, even this is being generous. Federal EEOC plainly mandates that a cis-het man can't go around the office soliciting women for a heterosexual softball league but Bostock clearly decided that a gay man can go around the office recruiting for a homosexual softball league in a manner that would get a het man fired. Overly broad? Fine line crossed? Or fuck you that's why? FIRE is telling you the library banned book displays not because the library *actually* banned displays but because Fuck You, That's Why.
Rules for Displays should be written – no political or religious groups or themes, and none that discriminate on the basis of race, sex, or nationality.
First, per your own retardation, FIRE hasn't even claimed they aren't written down. There may be a rule that in fact says "Only displays associated with federal holidays are allowed." and the librarians have been violating it and are now getting disciplined for repeatedly violating a policy that perfectly performs to your prescriptions.
That aside, I'm pretty sure there are librarians between here and UT and libertarians on this forum that are ready, willing, and able to tell you "Oh no, the city should not be telling the library dick." to wit, I can and will divide the baby n-ways: It's not your city or your library or my city or mine, if the city council wants to vest the decision in the library or reserve for themselves, it's up to the voters, not me, not you, not a district, nor a federal court, to fix any issues.
Further, FIRE is suing because the language is 'overly broad'. Well, a written rule that says "You can't set up a display that discriminates against race." strictly according to your prescriptions plainly forbids Black History Month and Heritage Month. Collision with free speech still imminent.
I look forward to my straight pride month, Conservative History Month, and the Covid-19 Natural Immunity Awareness month. Oh wait, these are all topics which will be banned by the progressives using the power of the authoritarian government.
My bucket of fucks to give about these kinds of things is pretty much empty. In better times, I might have taken an interest in the issues at stake here.
In these times, I'm just going to chuckle and enjoy the stifled librarians. What are real estate prices like in Orem, anyway?
I look forward to my straight pride month, Conservative History Month, and the Covid-19 Natural Immunity Awareness month. Oh wait, these are all topics which will be banned by the progressives using the power of the authoritarian government.
“City officials in Orem, Utah, have banned its public library from setting up displays highlighting Pride Month, Black History Month, and Hispanic Heritage Month, along with other heritage-themed holidays.”
Wouldn’t those celebrations violate the establishment clause? They go out of their way to call Christmas “Winter vacation” and “Year end break”, but somehow the racism and sodomy celebrations are okay cause the gods are different?
Black History Month was invented pre-wokeness. Or rather, it was invented when the Democrats supported the *wrong* kind of racial discrimination.
"making disparaging comments about the workplace, City policies, supervisors, co-workers . . . "
Now they are treading on the grounds that belong to the NLRB; talk about jealous gods!
If the description here is accurate, and considering that this is Reason I have no reason to believe that it is, it appears the city is attempting to censor employees as private individuals on any issue related to city government. That's pretty clearly a 1A violation. On the other hand telling government employees how to operate a library is obviously within the preview of elected officials. The city needs to get their library out of this ULA outfit for starters. Next they have to nail down what holidays the library should promote. Is Gay/Rainbow/Tranny Pride day a legal holiday in Utah? If not the librarians can STFU or find another job.
https://twitter.com/zerosuinfinito/status/1666816625784532993?t=7hzDC8K9dVd_tEg3Cdtheg&s=19
Satellite images from the College of DuPage Meteorology Department show that—on the 2nd of June—the fires that erupted in Quebec, Canada, all started at the exact same time.
[Video]
What happened to the library's "Capitalist Pride Month" display of books by
Friedman, Hayek, Mises, Smith, Nozick, etc? Oh, right, no library has ever done such a display.
Libraries are the bastions of the woke progressive left
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1666921404451680259?t=DQYPUx7nr4nppg10lgSYiQ&s=19
A Ukrainian woman living in Germany is found guilty and fined by a German court for pro-Russia comments, arguing that Russia is not the "aggressor.''
She faced prison but the judge didn't send her there only because she's unemployed with children:
[Link]
Speech is violence, ideas are dangerous.
Hilarious considering the official narrative is now that Ukraine destroyed the Nordstream pipelines...........making them the aggressor as far as Germany is concerned.
Imagine if American were prosecuted in the U.S. for denying that North Vietnam was the aggressor in the Vietnam War.
The German way is not the American way.
80 years later and you still can't take the Nazi out of Germany.
She faced prison but the judge didn’t send her there only because she’s unemployed with children:
Sounds like Germany could use a Section 230.
It's funny that you mention that. Remember when the internet was going to be overrun by hyperlitigious trolls and their armies of lawyers filing frivolous lawsuits?
Well, here's Reason backing FIRE for making a no-shit federal case because a City Council moved the Pride display to the adult section and nixed a librarians' raise for making a stink about it.
He would have sent her to prison if she were employed with children? What does being employed or not have to do with his decision?
https://twitter.com/Travis_in_Flint/status/1666930541797556226?t=rsWbTqol35vbttfRPgCWyg&s=19
Just In: the man who paid Joe Biden $5 million was an executive for Burisma Holdings, the natural gas company Hunter Biden sat on the board of directors for.
The confidential source had multiple meetings with this executive starting in 2015, and is considered extremely credible by the Justice Department. This raises some serious questions.
Will Burisma profit from the loss of Nordstream pipelines? How have the benefited from the billions in Ukraine? How bad is our government corrupted?
[Link]
How bad is our government corrupted?
About 8 out of 10.
Optimist.
Yeah, 11 out of 10 and just voted to raise the ceiling to 12.
But FIRE contends that these actions clearly violate the First Amendment. "The City of Orem's actions violate the First Amendment rights of both the ULA and Orem employees," FIRE attorney Gabe Walters said in a press release last Friday. "The city may not retaliate against employees for exercising their constitutionally protected rights of free speech and free association."
Fuck FIRE. My copy of the 1A says "*CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW*". Not "City employees cannot be denied a raise for refusing to participate." Not "Librarians are owed jobs." Not "The people owe AWFL librarians Pride displays during Pride month and Heritage displays during heritage month."
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a relatively libertarian organization is dead. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression a post-modern ACLU wearing the old FIRE like a skinsuit, is not a friend to liberty of any kind. Rather openly bringing the BLM/Antifa thug tactic of disrupting private business with our regard to the customer's association rights and shouting "Muh 1A." when the cops show up to silence them, to the court room.
Ah, you have the version before 14A was ratified.
How is telling libraries to not have any Pride-related themes any different than telling libraries to not have themes celebrating the Feast of the Annunciation?
Remember all the fuss when libraries devoted June to the Sacred Heart of Jesus?
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/251588/why-is-june-the-month-of-the-sacred-heart-of-jesus
The Orem Public Library also subjects employees to a restrictive social media policy that bars employees from “mak[ing] disparaging comments about the workplace, City policies, supervisors, co-workers, citizens, customers, or other persons associated with the City,” as well as prohibits “post[ing] any information to any blog, social networking site, or other public internet site, that would discredit or disparage the City.”
Nope, what I do on my own time is nobody’s business but mine. I will criticize anybody and everything from mothers-in-law to presidents to Mickey Mouse if I want to.
And you can do it from the employment line.
You don't have a divine right to have your rainbow religion celebrated on government grounds. Is the policy overbroad, sure but given the push for divisive rhetoric and action from the left it's probably better to not give the terrorist scum any avenue of attack as long as they are city employees.
You must get fired a lot.
I have to disagree with you. If they make the standard disclaimer on the social media account that their views are their own and not the views of their employers, it is government overreach to find, punish or fire them. Even private employers have to walk a real fine line with that type of termination. The government is further restricted. I'm sorry, but I have to agree with FIRE here. I agree the city council can ban displays, but I don't agree they can fire people for disagreeing with those bans on private time. Or speaking out in a city council meeting their displeasure, etc. That's a bridge to far.
private employers have to walk a real fine line with that type of termination …I don’t agree they can fire people for disagreeing with those bans on private time.
No one was fired and “speaking out in a city council meeting their displeasure” is presumptuous. And while I agree the social media speech ban is overly broad and the line *could* be fine it’s not clearly fine in this case, nor is it clear the overly broad nature is irrelevant.
Further, given that we, once again, get (as I indicated below) “Books moved from the children’s section to the adult section” = “ban”, I’m inclined to believe any 'fine line' and 'overly broad' from FIRE or their clients is bullshit. That is, and I think you’d agree, you can get on social media and say “Ugh! Mondays!” and any policy that bans it is overly broad but if you get on social media and say “My boss [by name] discriminates against black people when making hiring decisions.” the employer or city has every right to James Damore your ass without regard for the 1A or pretty much any policy not explicitly saying "We won't fire you for calling your boss a racist."
I would agree to a degree. If your boss has used obviously racist language or implemented or displayed racist tendencies, and you stated it, I think you would have grounds for wrongful termination. Especially if you could demonstrate the company was aware of this behavior and brushed it under the rug. But you may be right about FIRE’s motives. My big thing is the city council went way to far with their prohibition against what should be private speech. The actions involving the displays I think is permissible but curtailing private speech, by a government organization is no go in my book. Even, as in this case, when I don't exactly agree with it.
"Apply rules to the enemies of totalitarian leftism, but don't worry about those rules not being applied to the totalitarian left"
The bit where they tell the librarians not to protest off-the-job is, of course, a violation of free speech rights as currently construed by the courts.
However, the rest is perfectly fine. Government speech is properly under the control of elected officials, not civil servants under the delusion they're nobility. The idea that a government-owned library should be able to act "without government interference" is utterly ludicrous, and it is entirely reasonable for a city government to stop paying for its employees from getting indoctrination ("professional development") from an organization spouting such nonsense.
And insofar as FIRE is complaining that the city won't be putting money into ULA's coffers, FIRE utterly deserves to be put out.
Agreed. FIRE is right to protest the gross violation of speech, but are wrong on the latter charge. This is another story in my opinion where everyone is a bit of an asshole who doesn't truly understand everything theyre pushing.
FIRE is right to protest the gross violation of speech, but are wrong on the latter charge.
AFAICT, FIRExpression has yet to protest a gross violation of speech. Note: Every citation in this article is from thefire.org. Every. Single. Case. is an issue like this where someone's contract is allowed to expire, unrenewed, at term... or someone doesn't get an unpromised raise. As opposed to FIREducation, which opposed students being subjected to show trials in violation of the code of conduct, being told by the President of the University they couldn't wear a Halloween costumes, or speakers being uninvited at the 11th hour and student groups disparately having their facilities-use agreements violated.
I'm sorry, a government official telling someone, even an employee, what they can say in private speech is a gross violation in my book. For fuck sake even the military has rules regarding this, as long as the service member doesn't identify themselves as associated with the military they have pretty wide discretion (there is obviously some rules regarding racist, and they actually do include black supremacist organizations in that group, gangs, terrorist etc and obviously anything blatantly illegal but they also allow some that would surprise most people on both sides of the aisle). I've worked for government agencies a good portion of my career (worked at a number of community owned hospitals and currently working at one now in addition to extension and the military) and know that the government has very little actual power over what their employees can say during private time. You may be right on the rest. I do remember when FIRE was a different organization and maybe they've changed. But, fuck even the ACLU gets things right occasionally (always surprises me when they do but it happens). Of course the correct thing in my opinion is to end all this stupid division shit. We have way to much of this shit. It's all feel good bullshit meant to make them look like they care without actually having to do anything. But no one listens to me.
I’m sorry, a government official allegedly telling someone, even an employee, what they can say in private speech is a gross violation in my book.
Again, all of this is coming strictly in a context that is wholly owned by FIRE. *If* it was a previous director who set the ULA kickbacks in motion is also the one that put a social media policy in place to silence pro-Trump librarians and the current city council or library director is simply following the social media policy to the letter, FIRE is arguably obligated not to find that sort of information out. Even without such an earnest counter-narrative, blind faith acceptance of the plaintiff's case is not how we do justice. Both sides present a case, *then* we rule based on the evidence.
Point of order: "We" do not rule on anything. Courts rule on cases in accordance with the law (one would hope). "We" have opinions. "We" are posting them currently in a public forum.
https://twitter.com/alx/status/1666950396181397507?t=N-YclCsBi3Vow1e9MF9piQ&s=19
BREAKING: Donald Trump to be indicted, summoned to appear in court on Tuesday
[Link]
Perhaps the Biden Administration wants to give a boost to him in the Republican primaries?
Well they've just turned him into a martyr.
Perhaps they assume The People aren't going to do what we need to do because we're thoroughly conquered.
Actually... no perhaps about it.
They're right.
They're like retards playing with matches who don't understand that fire is hot.
While sitting in a puddle of gasoline.
I'm sure Sullum will be among shortly telling us how this political decision is different from Biden, Hillary, Comey, Obama, Pence and others.
It may be in a very nuanced way but the law shouldn't be applied if it requires that much nuance. Why is one guilty the other isn't? If you can't explain it at an 8th grade level, then the law is unjust. If it takes splitting hairs, then it is not being equally applied. Also, wasn't Trump impeached for trying to investigate someone who hadn't even announced their run for President? Yet, it's okay for Biden to not only investigate but indict an announced rival? Hmmm. Yeah, the whole quid pro quo thing that didn't actually end up having either a quid or a quo. But the talking heads all agreed what Trump did was use his power to ask for an investigation of a potential rival. And that was bad. Mmmkay? But it's totally different when Biden indicts an announced political rival. Mmmkay? Glad we can straighten that out. I'm getting fucking sick and tired of double standards and unequal justice. And I think Trump is a total douchebag but this is really making me empathize with him more than I ever wanted to.
The DOJ won't even specify what documents were "mishandled".
This is way, way beyond constitutional.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/fbi-helps-ukraine-censor-twitter-users-and-obtain-their-info-including-journalists
Twitter Files: FBI Helps Ukraine Censor Twitter Users And Obtain Their Info, Including Journalists
How is a government funded library a symbol of people's rights to think for themselves? The library (and thus ultimately government) picks the books!
(if they even carry books. Libraries are probably more responsible for putting Blockbuster out of business more than streaming or Redbox)
Ideally libraries would be privately funded
https://twitter.com/FrankDeScushin/status/1666822894335438857?t=ozXDf7flJ8fbRKLV4YJxmA&s=19
When migrants rape or stab European children, Leftists & Muslims don't worry about the kids, they worry about how the attacks "will be used by the far-right." It happened in England with groomers, now in France with stabbers.
The "far-right" are people who want to protect kids.
[Links]
Brown people violent bigotry are also the fault of Western Culture.
https://twitter.com/CBHeresy/status/1666745400378769408?t=-5d087UNlZ8swXs1DZa04A&s=19
This Orwellian sign is from an elementary school.
The department of Diversity & Engagement has put up signs to anonymously report “equity violations.”
Teaching the next generation to report each other for Thought Crimes. What could go wrong?
[Pic]
https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1666981707994525698?t=g3jR4wzam8zKx7FNNZl1bA&s=19
We learn Joe Biden took a $5 million bribe from Burisma which his son sat on the board of and on the same day his DOJ indicts a former president and his chief rival for 2024 for "mishandling" classified documents, which Biden kept in his office, garage and other places.
The Biden DOJ targeted school board parents as terrorists, launched FBI raids on peaceful protesters at abortion clinics, and goes after his political rivals as his Attorney General commits perjury and son commits crimes like people breathe air.
This is your country.
The DOJ went from hiding their corruption, to pretending they're not corrupt, to being corrupt loud and proud just because they can.
If this happened in Russia or some Middle Eastern hellhole, all the people cheering it on would call for regime change.
Goddamed hilarious. Dragging this pussy all over the place. He should have never apologized.
https://nypost.com/2023/06/08/blue-jays-anthony-bass-to-catch-first-pitch-at-pride-weekend/
No sympathy for the pitcher. Living on your knees is seldom a good idea, but he decided a few more dollars was worth it.
The Rainbow Inquisition now demands ritual humiliation.
“General manager Ross Atkins addressed Toronto media for the first time since Bass’ post and said he was “personally hurt” by what was shared on Instagram.”
Why should the General Manager be such a drama queen as to be personally hurt by anything that was not specifically directed at him.
And relevent to the Utah Lbrary story:
““My focus should be doing my job and being accepting of everyone’s decisions and views in life,” Bass said, according to MLB.com. “Through this process, moving forward, I’ll definitely know better than to post my personal beliefs on my social media platforms.””
Holy Fuck. Drilling down through all the links to FIRE’s bullshit looking for what official or actual censorship was documented as having taken place and, sure as shit:
“Rather than having multiple displays of LGBTQ books, as it did in 2021, the Orem library this year opted to have a single display in the adult books section.“
No references to any policies, no direct quotes, just allegations from the ULA and an awful, AWFL, former, part-time employee.
So the city did not “ban” the displays, merely shrunk and moved them to the adult (age appropriate) section?
Then the headline on this is disinformation. KMW should fire that leftist stooge who wrote it. But she won’t because it’s all click bait with her.
I would say it's Reason using the word "ban" to describe "not a ban" with regard to moving adult content out of the children's section of the local library, for like the fifth time in a row... except FIRE uses the word "ban" as well and FIRE's citation for the "ban" is the source I listed above.
Further if you read through Reason and FIRE's renditions, it's clear they're piling on because FIRE says they let other holiday displays stay up, Reason says the let other holiday-themed displays stay up, but Pride Month, Black History Month, Heritage Month... are not holidays, federally mandated or other.
Everyone is assholes and, AFAICT, the only group making an actual, no-shit federal case out of it is FIRE.
Thank you! I was just about to post the exact same thing. https://ula.org/oremstatement/
Doesn't anyone pay attention to the facts? The display was not banned, it was moved to a more appropriate location.
I see nothing wrong with that.
"Heritage month-themed displays" is not the same thing as "holiday-themed displays."
"Celebrating pride" is not the same thing as "Celebrating a National Holiday."
Let's not compare the two to try and pretend like one has anything to do with the other.
>> "Librarians should be able to do their jobs rather than be forced to tiptoe through the minefield of councilmembers' preferred political positions"
As, from the other side of their mouth, they demand everyone else to tiptoe through the minefield of THEIR OWN preferred political positions.
Their job is to put the books on the shelves using a numbered system, to check those books out to patrons, and to assist patrons in locating materials for which they are seeking.
It's not to advance social causes.
“Heritage month-themed displays” is not the same thing as “holiday-themed displays.”
Yes they are. They're all made-up. "Christmas", "Mother's Day", "Black History Month"... they're all figments of someone's imagination. The fact that the government bureaucrats made one a "national holiday" and not another is not something libertarians should lean on as an excuse.
They can all be celebrated, whether religious, or related to race, nationality, gender, whatever. Just keep them in the appropriate location.
Geez, libraries carry books about all this stuff, at least where I live.
No, they're not. Christmas honors a historical figure that helped create and define America in an objective sense. Columbus Day and Martin Luther King Jr. Day does as well. Presidents Day does the same with multiple people. Thanksgiving does so with a historical event. Independence Day does so with a REALLY BIG historical event.
"Pride-month" celebrates nothing as a contribution to anything. It's completely generic and serves only to divisively self-aggrandize. It's an insulting, degrading effort to make certain demographics feel like they're super duper special for no reason whatsoever other than they belong to said demographic. It's not merit-based, it's not history-based, it's doesn't tie into anything meaningful anywhere. If a National Holiday were the Stanley Cup, "Pride-Month" is nothing but an arbitrarily given participation trophy to people who have done nothing to earn anything except be born a certain way or join a certain social group.
National Holidays celebrate America. "Pride Month" celebrates insecure narcissists in pathetically desperate need of constant validation.
this is the way
Why wouldn’t the city council have the power to ban those stupid displays in public libraries?
I don’t agree with firing librarians who criticized the ban, though.
"Librarians should be able to do their jobs rather than be forced to tiptoe through the minefield of councilmembers' preferred political positions," said Rita Christensen, a former Orem Public Library employee."
Maybe the City Council's idea was to have the librarians do their jobs rather than spend time on performative pieties. I had thought an employer had the authirty to define what the duties of the employee's job are, not the employee. It seems an odd thing to contend that an agency of the government is properly out of the control of the elected officials of that government.
Towns controlled by FOG (Friends of Groomers) should be required to rename their town libraries, 'Pubic' instead of 'Public' and that will solve a lot of problems for parents trying to raise normal children.
Well put, and funny too. Weirdos take themselves too seriously.
We should celebrate behavior that is actually beneficial to society.
In June 2022, Orem city officials banned the Orem Public Library from setting up any Pride Month–themed displays in the library's children or teen sections, prompting backlash from the ULA, which called on the city to reverse the ban. Instead, the city enacted further bans, prohibiting the library from making any heritage month–themed displays—including Black History Month, Hispanic Heritage Month, and Native American History Month–themed book displays. Notably, this ban did not apply to other holiday-themed displays, such as Christmas or the Fourth of July.
Pride/Heritage months are not holidays. Therefore, saying "this ban did not apply to other holidays" is completely ridiculous. Be better.
Holidays are all made-up. “Christmas”, “Mother’s Day”, “Black History Month”… they’re all figments of someone’s imagination. The fact that the government bureaucrats made one a “national holiday” and not another is not something libertarians should lean on as an excuse.
For sound economic perspective go to https://honesteconomics.substack.com/
Freedom of Speech? What about Freedom of Association, i.e. the town severed it's association from ULA which has gone too far woke for their taste. Libertarians do NOT have to give reasons why they associate with anyone (unless they write for Reason).
FIRE doesn't accuse them of violating the Constitution; instead they ask for 'clarification' i.e. you are presumed guilty until you prove to us you are innocent. Go fish. This is America not Russia or North Korea or the DOJ investigating Trump.
FIRE is correct - the social media policy is overbroad, vague and chills free speech and should be trashed and rewritten to make clear that non libelous and protected speech made on your own dime and time, is perfectly ok.
Yeah, I’m not worried about this so much as I’m worried about the trans drag shows for kids - children! We have seen extensive evidence of leftist doxxing people, physically, attacking and assaulting people getting people fired, harassing people, fire bombing, their businesses, destroying their allies and reputations over opposition viewpoints screw these librarians. If they don’t like it, they can leave.
So what, the left does this a million times more often. GFY.
Abnormal behavior is nothing to be "proud" about.
Not all behaviors are of equal value.
...and people like you get to decide what is "normal"? No way.
THis is pure REASON stuff...you get 2 choices: The Utah folks are all evil, or the Utah folks are all good.
And you are supposed to feel respected because they asked.
Sounds like the city was doing their Constitutional duty. Gay people have no "right" to special treatment by government.
I have to question why Emma is so hell bent on Progressive Librarians being able to use government resources via taxes to indoctrinate children.
I have no problem with the "ban" on the "heritage celebrations". The only place I see a problem with this is if a "City" employee states their opinion as an individual, with no reference to their job, on their own page or blog and is penalized for it, then I have a problem.
Is your bosses house an open public forum? Then it doesn't compare. A city council meeting is an open fucking forum they can't dictate even what their employees say in that space. End of fucking story.
Don't I fucking know it. It to much resembles the type of country my great uncle was wounded fighting against in some godforsaken Belgium Forest. And my other great uncle was also in that same damn forest fighting against it (then he went and fought against another similar government in some godforsaken Asian Peninsula). Shit my sixteenth cousin left his noble life to fight for liberty, against the wishes of his King, was made a brigadier at the age of 23 and Pershing even honored him when he arrived in France. I'm sure he wouldn't recognize our country. Or he would, and it would resemble to much what he helped overthrow in his own countries Revolution (or what replaced the King in his own countries Revolution, probably more of the latter with fewer of Dr Guillotine's inventions in the town square... Yet).
Not under the open government laws in most states.
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
Forum. “ a meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged”
A forum is explicitly designed for such exchanges.
I see nothing in your own definition about design and the notion is fundamentally retarded. Radio waves weren't designed for an exchange of ideas but can be used as a forum for such.
Radio waves weren't designed. Radio waves were discovered. Two way radios, on the other hand were designed for an exchange of ideas. Just a little bit of your own argumentum ad absurdum. Also, mine is more accurate and true.
Also, mine is more accurate and true.
Incorrect. Yours is less relevant as you don’t actually address his definition and, in it’s irrelevance, can’t be more distinguishably accurate or true.
My argument wasn’t whether radio waves or radios were discovered or invented, my argument was that design wasn’t part of the definition he provided and that something constituting a medium could fit his definition without design.
Yours is the ad absurdum argument as you ignore my point and proceed off on your own irrelevant tangent.