To the Editor:

While visiting the Guilderland Public Library a few days ago, I planned to drop off a few magazines at the exchange rack. I had a few sports, “Better Homes and Gardens,” and religious magazines.

One of the staff persons was next to me; she was putting some magazines in place.

We had the same sports magazine and I commented on that. She looked at mine and said I was not allowed to put the religious or pro-life ones at the library; some people will be offended she said. So I left with my magazines.

I have lived in Guilderland for years and visited the library many times. I did not realize that there is such censorship there. After all, this is a library, and, if each of us looked through the different sections and selections, we each could find something offensive.

Where is intellectual freedom at the Guilderland library? The rights of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction. Citizenry must be well informed. Libraries provide the ideas and information in a variety f formats to allow people to inform themselves.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that there are certain categories of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment: obscenity, child pornography, and defamation, speech that incites imminent lawless action.

Can it be that some individuals seek to deny access because they find some ideas offensive and do not want others to have access to those materials? The library should be a neutral provider of information from all points of view.

Joanne Clough

Guilderland

Editor’s note: Timothy Wiles, director of the Guilderland Public Library, said the space for the magazine exchange is limited. The library doesn’t accept magazines older than a year. “We do put out magazines about religion,” he said, naming titles from a few traditions, “but not religious/political magazines.” The practice, which is not a formal policy, he said, is not to accept magazines “proselytizing and religious point of view.”