We would like to revisit an issue that was discussed in the last issue of the paper prior to its summer recess, regarding the censorship of the League of Women Voters of Harvard by the Fourth of July Committee.
Arm in Arm firmly stands with and supports the LWV.
We do not believe that the League should have been singled out for carrying what was deemed a political message by a minority of committee members. After all, other groups with clear political observance participated in the parade. Even state politicians marched in the parade. While a general code of conduct is understandable, one that arbitrarily silences another participant is not. A small number of the committee members drafted and subjected participants to a code of conduct. It was an abuse of that position to impose restrictions on or suppress language by another in favor of their personal opinions and such abuse should not be tolerated. Certainly we get into dangerous territory if any group can deem speech inappropriate.
Previously, we supported the Select Board when it adopted a diversity statement that not only acknowledged the value of a diversity of perspectives but also insisted that the town would “consistently demonstrate our commitment to understanding, acceptance, and equity for all. Our expectations are high, our standards non-negotiable.”
Gender, the main issue challenged by the committee, is central to equality and equity and is most undeniably a human right. Even if the code in question had been approved by all members of this small group/committee, the sign stating that “gender rights are human rights” could not be “reasonably considered demeaning, discriminatory or harassing behavior or speech deemed inappropriate” and thus didn’t violate the code, nor is this committee charged with or trained in judging such matters.
The town governing board should not allow a small group of volunteers to hijack the board’s own commitment and impose their own moral agenda on others. To do so would allow private “pressure groups” who are of the minority opinion to render the town’s welcoming and inclusive statement void. And, we daresay, would render the welcoming nature of our town void as well.
Sharon Cronin, on behalf of Arm in Arm
