I think back in 2008 when she and her friends were dancing and asked, and then told, to stop, they should have taken that direction.
Then they could have worked within the system to change that policy if they did not like it.
Instead, it seems to me, they chose to heighten the drama and use civil disobedience as their first like of action.
Just doesn't seem to make sense.
And the policy doesn't seem unreasonable. They can dance right outside the memorial, on the steps, on the grass, whatever.
Childish petulant behavior, IMHO.
The suit stems from a dance by Mary B. Oberwetter and her friends inside the memorial at 11:55 p.m. on April 12, 2008, the eve of Jefferson’s birthday.
Oberwetter and the others were listening to music on headphones and engaging in expressive dancing to honor “the individualist spirit for which Jefferson is known,” Oberwetter’s attorney, Alan Gura, wrote in court papers.
That’s when U.S. Park Police Officer Kenneth Hilliard showed up and told them to stop. When Oberwetter refused and asked why he was demanding they stop their jigs, Hilliard arrested and charged Oberwetter with demonstrating without a permit and interfering with an agency function. The charges were eventually dropped.
Oberwetter then sued the Park Service in March 2009, alleging that it violated her rights to free expression and asked Bates to block the government from taking such steps in the future. She also sought monetary damages against Hilliard and the Park Service for violating her rights. The Justice Department argued for the Park Service that the government had the right to regulate activities inside the memorial because it is seeking to maintain a quiet atmosphere.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/crime-scene/del-quentin-wilber/no-dancing-at-jefferson-memori.htmlBut that's just me.
I know others think these were acts of great significance.
:shrug:
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
