Town Refuses to Ask Citizens If Library Porn Should Be Filtered Out - Please Help Us!

Plan2Succeed.org ^ | 22 Dec 2003 | Plan2Succeed.org

[milan]

Porn is John Ashcroft buying 20,000 drapes with MY DAMN MONEY to cover some marble boobs.

That's more obscene than a whip handle up the ass.

My God, I agree with someone. That was extreme. He covered legitimate art. That is censorship too far. Stopping porn viewing at a public library is not.

[eno_]

PLeae...Lweis Carrl wrote the book...he was a known user of hallucigens and even attributed his work on that very book to the unfluence of ether...do a little research (that PC you're on can connect you to Carrol sites..see why filters are useless?)

To milan, that is useless information. Anything that does not fit a sexless church-lady weltanschauung is fit to be filtered out.

[Always Right]

Why not have it be opt-in. If your kid can't be trusted, put a big red dot on their library card so the librarians know to turn on filters for those kids.

Systems are setup so adults and children with the proper permission can get unfiltered access. So the whole censorship arguement is mute.

[leadpenny]

I know all about filters I care to. Just made another pot of coffee.

[Amelia]

I work for a school. Our school has filtering software. Lots of interesting things are blocked, including Free Republic, but the kids still seem to be able to get to sites with profanity-filled rap lyrics, etc. They will also tend to download games & look at other things when they are supposed to be doing class research.

In addition, Spybot classifies the filtering software as spyware which targets the kiddies with specific advertisements. Isn't that special?

The bottom line is, even with the filtering software, adults still need to supervise students using the internet or they will go places they shouldn't be.

I also think your local politics should remain a local matter. Isn't it funny how we conservatives always scream for local control, unless people from outside can come and support us in an apparently unpopular cause?

[bk1000]

Libraries do not carry poro periodicals or offer porno videos, so why is there an issue with internet porn? Are you offended that your local library might not offer the latest Jill Kelly release? There have always been books or info kept out of public libraries, you just didn't know it. Suddenly with the internet, you feel you are entitled to all the information there is and any effort to limit access is an abomination of your rights. BS. The internet has made it more difficult to keep hard core porn away from kids. Back in the day, there was nothing but Playboy or National Geographic, so there was little trouble policing what the kids saw.
Why would you have a problem with keeping hard porn away from minors in a public library? Nobody says you can't look at all the porn you want, but it is just too easy for kids these days. Truth be told, there should not even be internet access in a public library. A library is a quiet place for reading books, not tapping and clicking.

[Always Right]

My God, I agree with someone. That was extreme. He covered legitimate art. That is censorship too far.

That's Aschrofts place of work. If he finds it offensive, as some people do, he has every right to cover it up. No one has a right to have their work displayed in a government building. Decoration and art are personal taste, and since Ashcroft is in charge, he has every right to excercize it. If someone put something up you found offensive at your business, you have no right to take it down or cover it up. What kind of twisted idea of the first amendment is that. If someone wishes to display this work of art, that is completely up to them. It is not like he destroyed it, which I would of had problems with.

[leadpenny]

I also think your local politics should remain a local matter.

That can't happen when most localities have taken fed money via the Universal Telephone Service Fee through the FCC. It's the old "strings attached" routine.

[Always Right]

I also think your local politics should remain a local matter. Isn't it funny how we conservatives always scream for local control

Actually, if you really understand what is going on with this post it is about local control. The ALA have taken over control of most libraries and the local people are ignored and have no input in the whole process. No one has advocated a federal solution here, but this individual is looking for a local solution to the library Nazis.

[leadpenny]

You have no idea how I feel. I do believe in personal responsibility. And I do FEEL that internet filters are a slippery slope. I'll ask you the same question I've asked before, who decides what gets filtered? Your neighbor? The police? Who?

[leadpenny]

Are you saying that porn has some meaningful positive impact on our society?

Why do you insist on continuing your attempt to put words in my mouth?

[Mark was here]

A library is a quiet place for reading books, not tapping and clicking.

Exactly!

Libraries are for books, when people were loosing interest in books, libraries started offering computers, not because they wanted to provide information, but so they could get bodies back in the libraries to justify the government jobs libraries provide. It is about money for government workers, nothing else.

If someone wants to view the internet away from home they should go to an internet cafe, that does not have to compete with a taxpayer subsidized cafe.

Libraries are for books, not for videos and games, that is what Blockbusters is for...

[Birdman]

Agreed. Fundamentally I think this is about the right for a town (the most base form of democracy)to determine FOR THEMSELVES whether they want THEIR tax money spent on filters.

An argument that sat well with me was 'should a library give access to on line content they wouldn't stock on their shelves?'

[bk1000]

"who decides what gets filtered?"

Probably the same people who decide what books go into the library now. Under your current delusion, every library would have every book. What about the classic literature banned from public school reading lists? I find that much more offensive than banning porn. Like I said, you've been policed by the library police all your life, you just didn't know it.

[VRWC_minion]

Recipe:

1. Go to library,
2. Print out porn on 8 1/2 by 11 sheets
3. Pass out porn with reference to Library at town meetings and local PTA meetings.
4. Let set.

[Cvengr]

Who's going to determine what "porno" is, a Library Filter Committee?

One can begin with the same person/s who decide to fund the library.

[Always Right]

You have no idea how I feel. I do believe in personal responsibility. And I do FEEL that internet filters are a slippery slope. I'll ask you the same question I've asked before, who decides what gets filtered? Your neighbor? The police? Who?

Here's a thought for your thick skull, maybe the people who flip the bill for the library and have children who visit the library, should have a say at what goes on in the library. Librarians are terrified at this thought.

[milan]

Why do you insist on continuing your attempt to put words in my mouth?

I wasn't. I was asking you a question. If you said "no" then your answer would have been "no". See how that works?

[Always Right]

Recipe:

1. Go to library,
2. Print out porn on 8 1/2 by 11 sheets
3. Pass out porn with reference to Library at town meetings and local PTA meetings.
4. Let set.

Even better, go to one of their recommended kids sites like Go Ask Alice, and print their 'health information' out about the pleasures of 'safe' rimming and beastiality. Yep, great info for kids.

[VRWC_minion]

As a community we filter what our children see now. The use of a software tool is no different than an onoff switch or a paper bag.