Julie Andrews defends filth for kids
Hollywood actors have been self-destructing for as long as any of us can remember. Even those who are known mostly for children’s movies. After all, if a person falls into a vat of purple dye, they come out purple. They don’t even have to like purple. They will be purple. Likewise, if a person is surrounded by Hollywood liberal flakes day in and day out, the chances are, they will soon start sounding and acting like a run-of-the-mill Hollywood flake.Below is an email we received from the organization Grassroots American Values. We have always endorsed this group, which is at the forefront of the war that America’s most powerful librarians have declared on you and your children. The same librarians who pull books from the shelves because of their religious content will scream “book burning” if a parent objects to a “children’s book” in the children’s section that is replete with expletives that would make your ears burn.
This group had a debate with a local liberal newspaper that advocated the placement of books full of filthy language and explicit sexual descriptions in the children’s section of libraries, a policy that is in line with that of the leftwing ALA (American Librarians Association). A member of Grassroots American Values wrote a letter to the editors of that paper with direct quotes from the book they endorsed as a “children’s” book. The editors said they could not print the letter because of the explicit content. Yet they were saying this same content that they censored was appropriate for children.
Julie Andrews now writes children’s literature. No one is saying her books are full of inappropriate content. But like all good liberals, she takes the standard ALA viewpoint that children can be exposed to anything and everything, including all expletives and any imaginable explicit sexual description, and not only is this not harmful to children, but parents need to step aside and keep their mouths shut. (Our latest article on children as property of the State
http://laiglesforum.com/2007/12/27/nationalizing-childrenaspx ties in with this idea that parents are no longer viewed as having the right to choose the kind of material their kids are exposed to. That that article relates to Germany clearly demonstrates that the viewpoins of the Left are very much international and amazingly homogeneous).
On November/2007 Grassroots American Values contacted Julie Andrews. We asked if she “condones ALA policies on books for children.” We reminded her that her own books, written for children, would be on the same shelves as Paul Ruditis’ “Rainbow Party,” John Green’s “Looking for Alaska,” and Robert Cormier’s “Fade” (all age-inappropriate books). Below is the dismissive answer we received from “The Julie Andrews Collection Editorial Team.” Keep this in mind next time you consider watching one of her movies or buying her books.
Grassroots American Values www.plan2succeed.org/grassroots
Subj: Re: Question to Julie Andrews
Date: 11/30/2007 10:31:09 A.M. Eastern Standard Time
From: info@julieandrewscollection.com
To: elyse.marshall@harpercollins.com, Marisa.Wetzel@harpercollins.com, Nicole.Mathieu@Harpercollins.com, cindy.tamasi@harpercollinscom, mail@emmawaltonhamilton.com, sraab@raabassociates.com
[...] Ms. Andrews is a staunch supporter of ALA and a lifelong advocate for libraries everywhere. A transcript of her speech at ALA’s 2007 annual convention in Washington DC is available on the Julie Andrews Collection website at www.julieandrewscollection.com/sitev2/librarians.php We hope that reading this transcript will answer any questions you have and will provide closure on this matter, as limitations of time and resources do not permit us to engage in further dialogue on this subject. [...]
Laigle’s Forum urges you the reader to contact the Julie Andrews Collection at the addresses listed above and ask why Julie Andrews endorses filth for children. Please visit the Grassroots American Values website first at www.plan2succeed.org/grassroots and find out how the ALA endorses age-inappropriate literature for kids in libraries.
Update on Congressman Todd Platts and Hate Crimes
We had promised to keep you abreast of developments with a PA congressman who purports to be Christian and conservative but who voted for hate crimes bills. We had a long conversation with Mr. Platts about a month ago and he tried to defend his position saying that Christians are equally protected under this law. Later we noted that a pro-life group in CA had been harrassed by the police. We urged our friends to contact Todd’s office and ask him how his wonderful hate crimes bill would protect them against this obvious anti-Christian discrimination. He arroganttly returned an empty email to each of them, including us.
We later spoke with an assistant in his local office and she was a very strong advocate of this bill, knew a lot about it, and was extremely defensive, which seemed rather odd.
Now, just this weekend, an article appeared in the local paper (http://ydr.inyork.com/ci_7802477) naming Todd Platts in a lawsuit. The local government is trying to seize land from a local farmer and, allegedly, they have recruited Platts to engage the IRS in trying to have the land seized by the federal government.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 3rd, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Milla wrote:
Thanks for supporting our cause! There are just a couple of minor problems with your introductory text.
Actually librarians don’t “pull books from the shelves because of their religious content”; they simply choose not to purchase these books in the first place. It would be better to state: The same librarians who choose not to purchase books with religious content, will scream “book burning” if a parent objects to a “children’s book” in the children’s section that is replete with expletives that would make your ears burn.
Second, the paper did not advocate “the placement of books full of filthy language and explicit sexual descriptions in the children’s section of libraries”; they took the side of the librarian (who, it seems, embraces ALA values). They actually called them “books about whole body health,” LOL! The paper did print my letter, but with the asterisks I used to replace foul words (which made OUR point of the inadequacy of such books for children). Unfortunately the web master posted the letter in the web site.
Letter sent to the Sandusky Register on March 13, 2006:
Dear Sandusky Register editorial board members:
The board of directors of Grassroots American Values was surprised you were shocked by the letter sent to each of you and that you considered it to be a “mass mailing”. The materials it contained came from publications intended for minors, easily accessible in the Children and Young Adult sections of Public Libraries.
It is peculiar that adults –who considered these items unfit for ”the U.S. mail or the Sandusky Register” and “offensive to public sensibilities”, who would not publish the “graphic depictions of female nudity” because their “newspaper [is] delivered to homes in which minor children live”— feel comfortable with them remaining in areas Public Libraries intend for minor children.
According to you “Librarians are not babysitters, moral judges or replacements for parental control”; yet you took these roles upon yourselves when deciding not to publish the images and excerpts we sent.
Below are the “books about whole body health” (according to you) we sent you that shocked your sensibilities:
- Seventeen [magazine] (10/05)
- Deal with it, Esther Drill
- It’s Perfectly Normal, Robie H. Harris
- Tenderness, Robert Cormier
- The perks of being a wallflower, Stephen Chbosky
Excerpt from “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” (grade 9 up, according to School Library Journal), one of these “books about whole body health”: “… she grabbed his p**** with her hands and started moving it…. the boy pushed the girl’s head down, and she started to kiss his p****…. she stopped crying because he put his p**** in her mouth….”
Your editorial title (Grassroots’ Mailing Unfit for Public View) and your “shock” made OUR point: items like the ones above are unfit for the view of minors. And, yes, “there’s a time and place for everything”; parents, not Libraries or the ALA, are the ones to decide!
Board of Directors
Grassroots American Values
February 21st, 2009 at 3:42 pm
As someone who has read years beyond her age since a young child, I have a somewhat liberal outlook on this. I think we often underestimate the maturity of our children and what they can handle. All great books have been at one time or another frowned upon.