Please remember our user guide when commenting. We ask that you refrain from personal attacks.

That will work. :)

Why not just put up a nice protrait of a jewish rabbi? really, you can't please everybody, and art generally doesn't. If I only paint apples, why should I have to take my apples down becasue someone is allergic to them or doesn't like them? getting kind ridiculous with all the "offeses" these days and people having to cowtow to them. Geez.

This is crazy, you guys said public library, key word public. When we are in a public environment, we have no control of what we see or here. We are subject to see things and here things that we don't bellieve everytime we leave our home. I believe this lady needs to study our constition rights. I am ashame of Grayson library, assume the books on Christian faith should be removed as well.

It would seem to me the reasonable outcome of Ms. Spruill's statement that "The scope of this particular exhibit was a little too narrow...represented a singular point of view..." is there will no longer be library displays of vegetarian cookbooks (can't offend the carnivores), Valentine's hearts (someone might be newly single by choice or fate). You think those are silly, but what about patriotic 4th of July displays...what about Black History Month displays? They will have to take those down,too. I love libraries and always thought one of the main purposes was to broaden the experiences of patrons. How very sad that in the name of "tolerance" we are be coming increasingly intolerant. Here are some words found in this very library. (1) "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities."--Ayn Rand (2) First they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the Socialists and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.--German Pastor Martin Niemoller.

I agree.

Wow. This is what annoys me about our society. Did we really just have our library take down an art display because one person was offended? Really? This person has nothing better to do than to be offended by something like this? Who goes around town just looking for something to piss them off? And why do we kow-tow (sp?) to every person that's going to complain? Some people are going to be upset by something, no matter what you do. Tough. If you want the display to be more inclusive of your faith, then start painting pictures of rabbis. I bet this person wouldn't have complained at all if the display would have had nothing but Jewish things in it. But even so, is there some rule in place that we have to give equal time all the way around to everything? If so, I may have missed it....

People seem to miss the fact that our Constitution does not give us a freedom FROM religion. There is nothing that says we should be free from seeing religious displays in our life, including public buildings. And there is definitely nothing in the Constitution that protects us from being offended by something.

You know what really offends me? People that are offended by every silly thing.

Warning: open cynicism to follow...
None of us should be shocked. All of us should get used to this. America once had its highest loyalty to God. Then America's highest priority was patriotism - we worshiped our nation. Now we have taken the final step wherein the new king before whom we bow is individualism. God to Nationalism to Individualism. When we worship our individual selves, everybody believes their personal desires the best to become public policy.

Seriously ... It's a display in a library ... It's not like anyone will actually see it !

Think for a moment of the outrage and the gathering mob of torches and pitchforks if the artist had posted portraits of Satanists or even Muslims before you go off.

I LOVE this quote too

"It was not about religion – it was about my relationship with Jesus "
LOL

Lets see --
Race
Creed
Color
Sex and/or Orientation
National Origin

Hummmmmmmm................. Something is missing

Help us here.........

Had another thought...if the library showcases local artists, and this was a local artist, then the library is endorsing the artist, and not necessarily his subject matter. Can you say...censorship? Even if th subject matter was an issue, then should they take down MLK or Malcolm X? Where do you draw lines? Se how ridiculous it can get?

Tammy...
The library showcases art work within their own guidelines at their discretion. It's not "censorship" at all if they deem the artwork to be outside their preferences.

As a matter of fact the exhibit included Juanita Bynam, Creflo Dollar along with MLK and Charles Stanley. There was no Rabbi, mid-eastern or far-eastern figure.

The library has worked with him before and saw no harm in showing his latest project.
I don't see any harm either

But for one disgruntled "citizen"...............

Grant, we all screamed censorship when someone tried to stop the libraries carrying The Harry Potter books. I think that deciding what shouldn't be shown can be seen as censorship, or at the very least an infringement of free expression. There is nothing that forces you to look at what's on the walls at the library. Stop and look if it is of interest to you, don't if it's not. Preventing other people looking because you don't want to is something I don't understand.

Nope, someone might consider that too racy. You will have to reserve it somewhere else.

Sharon ,

I dont remember screaming "censorship" when that crazy lady was all up in arms over the Harry Potter books... As I recal by her own admission she had never read them so I'm quite sure I used some words to describe her tirade though "censorship" was never one of them .

While I completely agree that the library systems refusal to carry a recent popular work of fiction is ridiculous they do have some sort of written "standard".to apply to material , much like they have a standard they apply to artwork they choose to display.. Big difference too , between a book that one can choose to read or not and artwork on display for all to see.

Grant, I wasn't referring to you specifically, but in general there was a shout of censorship - as in Fifty Shades of Grey. We all have things we'd rather not see - all around us. I just believe it is our personal responsibility to avoid looking - especially when it is something as simple as a portrait. If it were pictures of dead bodies or something it is one thing, but you really have to know something about who those people were in the portraits to even know who they were. Just another example of people forcing other people to their point of view. Whatever happened to live and let live. We're way to focused on other people's lives now.

I can't express how very disappointed I am in our Grayson Library. A library is a public place that is supposed to encourage diversity and the pursuit of knowledge. Sad days indeed.

11:35 am on Friday, July 20, 2012

Sharon Swanepoel --
Whatever happened to live and let live.

Susan S --
A library is a public place that is supposed to encourage diversity and the pursuit of knowledge.

Frank Sinatra said it best.
Live your life,
Just DO IT ------ MY WAY :-)

Still need that book ? :-|

If only I had time to read it. However, without any copies in the local library in Gwinnett, you could have yourself a good cottage industry springing up here. Charge a nominal fee and you might not be able to keep it on your own bookshelf. :)

For the price of a few late fees, there's always Amazon Sharon lol