When Did Access To Porn Become A God-Given Right?
- Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:44pm by
Mike Opelka
- Print »
- Email »
Is porn, or the free access to porn a right of all American adults? Many of our nation’s public libraries are acting that way.
Prompted by a story in the LA Times about the Los Angeles City Council debating on how to provide adequate access to hard-core porn for adults, while protecting children, on the nearly 3000 public computers in libraries, I began looking into the topic of ‘Public Library Porn Access.’ The findings are quite surprising.
A Supreme Court case from eight years ago offers some clarity on this continuing conundrum. As reported by the American Booksellers Association in 2003;
On Monday, June 23, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 6 – 3 to uphold the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), which requires public libraries seeking government subsidies to install filtering software to block materials considered obscene, child pornography, or “harmful to minors.” The American Library Association (ALA) and American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) had challenged the law, contending that it violated the First Amendment.
The American Library Association was not pleased with this ruling and, citing First Amendment concerns, officially denounced it on their website. However, the law of the land stated that libraries taking government funding were required to filter internet content to protect children.
But the push for free public porn did not end there. There seem to be as many different opinions and regulations on this topic as their are libraries.
After being sued by the ACLU and losing in a lower court, libraries in Washington State won back the right to filter internet content when their State Supreme Court ruled against porn access in a 6-3 decision. Their finding, posted online by seattlepi.com stated;
“A public library has traditionally and historically enjoyed broad discretion to select materials to add to its collection of printed materials for its patrons’ use. We conclude that the same discretion must be afforded a public library to choose what materials from millions of Internet sites it will add to its collection and make available to its patrons,” the opinion said. “A public library has never been required to include all constitutionally protected speech in its collection and has traditionally had the authority, for example, to legitimately decline to include adult-oriented material such as pornography in its collection. This same discretion continues to exist with respect to Internet materials.”
Across the country in Florida, libraries in St. John’s County have separate computers for adults and children. The adult computers have no filters, while those reserved for the kids are blocking access to sites determined to be ‘objectionable.’
Meanwhile, in Oklahoma, the Muskogee Phoenix reports that some of the libraries have decided that access shall not be denied, but ‘privacy screens’ will be employed to prevent anyone except the user from seeing the computer screen. One of the library’s directors, Mary Moroney addressed complaints and concerns by saying;
“Public libraries should provide free and open access to all information to anybody who comes in the door.”
It is difficult to argue with the basic statement made by Ms. Moroney, I just wonder when porn became classified as ‘information.’
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 591 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 417 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 415 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 385 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 376 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 417 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 415 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 385 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 151 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know 100 Comments- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 303 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 417 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (236)
Steven63
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:45pm@ Doc…
“My rights came from an enlightened group of PATRIOTS who sacrificed their lives in order that we ALL have them.”
What man gave you, man can take away…
If you believe that a group of dudes got together and said…”here ya go Doc! This is yours I fought for it” your wrong. Rights are inherent – read that in the U.S. Constitution/Declaration of Independence. NOWHERE in that document will you find the founders proclaiming that they fought for them and gave them to you, Doc. NOWHERE.
Read the Magna Carta, Doc. Start there.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:58pmOh, please…. what do you think the friggin’ REVOLUTION was about?
I read the Magna Carta and those tenets were NEVER given the RULE OF LAW until OUR FOUNDERS did.
And don’t patronize me, pookie… you’re WAY out of your league.
Report Post »Juris
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:45pmDoc,
Your problem seems to be that you are incapable of accepting a compelling argument that challenges your perspective. You dismiss the logic our Founders embraced (as evidenced in their writings) in one breath and pay them lipservice as supreme lawgivers in the next. You acknowledge the greatness of this Republic, while demonstrating your complete failure to understand the underlying reasons for that greatness. You reject objective definitions as subjective, because they fail your subjective test.
Diagnosis: You, sir, are cracked.
Report Post »GoodGravy
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:51pm@Docstrangelove
You are confusing who fought for our rights and who gave them to us. The rights we have as men (in the anthropological sense) were given by God, taken away from us by the British, then fought for and won back by the colonists. At no time did the rights not exist before the revolutionary war, they were just not allowed to be exercised. In my opinion the constitution spells out only 3 rights given by God; Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. The remainder of the Bill of Rights is most certainly man made and that is why they are flawed, because we, as humans, are flawed. Yes, even me.
Tell me, if you can, where there is a flaw in any of the 3 God given rights? There isn’t any, because it is understood that EVERY HUMAN has a right to life (even those that can’t speak for themselves in the womb), the right to live however they choose (even if others don’t like it or disagree with it), and the right to pursue happiness in whatever form that may take. This is the most touchy one because you could easily argue that in your pursuit of happiness you prefer to watch porn or kill babies because that makes you happy. Here is why God is smart and you aren’t, you can exercise your rights in ANY way you so choose as long as it doesn’t impinge on anyone else and their God given rights. So, in conclusion, you and anyone else who likes can look at porn all day and night if you choose, but because it makes me unhappy to have my money that is stripped from my pocket as taxes used to subsidize your porn, it violates my pursuit of happiness and is therefore wrong. If you are in a privately funded library that receives not a penny of tax money from anywhere, go ahead, have your free porn. Your the one that will have to answer for your personal choices in the end.
Report Post »Swordsmansmith
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 11:12pmsunlight=truth and sunlight turns trolls to stone. You cant argue with someone who outright denies the truth. Best to let it be and be thankful you youtself are not so blind to truth.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 11:24pmGOODGRAVY…
PROVE it.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 11:41pmJURIS…
You pose NO rebuttals…. just vapid hyperbole.
Get lost.
Report Post »drago
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:41pmPlease dont feed the trolls……..
Report Post »Johnny1
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:39pmI just checked the Constitution, and the right to porn in public libraries is not in there. The closest thing to it is freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Correct me if I’m wrong, but freedom of Speech is freedom to make speech… not freedom to have your speech (or art, or porn) made available in every public corner on the taxpayer’s dime. Freedom of the press is equal access to the press (and the idea that the government cannot control the press). There is NOT freedom to information. (The freedom of information act is a different thing entirely designed enable citizens to reduce corruption in the government, not as a means of helping citizens access private-sector-produced goods in the form of digital information).
Report Post »liberalsarealiens
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:39pmIt became acceptable when the damn progressives started controling everything in their attempts to destroy the MORAL FABRIC of our nation! Now any and everything goes! Thanks ACLU, and the rest of the Godless left!
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:46pmYou bore me.
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:07pm@DOC
Report Post »ditto, obsit, ibid.
Chet Hempstead
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 11:52pmYou’re welcome, it was our pleasure.
Report Post »Steven63
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:37pm@ Doc…
“DESCRIBE “porn”.”
No problem Doc:
Porn: the act of providing sexual gratification to ones-self or another while recording said act for the sake of ones-self or another.
I know you were hoping I would be graphic (for purely selfish reasons as you sit behind your computer) and I’m not sorry to dissapoint you.
Now, please prove that my definition is not acurate. Otherwise…SHADDUP.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:54pmSTEVEN63..
Is that only in movies or still photos?
What about the printed word or drawings?
What is the LEGAL definition of porn and is it standard for all States and Municipalities?
You see, little one.. despite your delusional claims to erudition, your juvenile and simplistic definitions don’t come CLOSE to sufficing the complexities of the issue… differences that can effect our HARD FOUGHT… HUMAN-GIVEN RIGHTS in this great country of ours.
It takes MUCH more thought than you seem capable of to come to a considered, INTELLIGENT consensus…. which is why EDUCATED people haven’t been able to come to a conclusion on this matter.
Back to your sandbox… and YOU can SHADDUP as well.
Chet Hempstead
Posted on April 16, 2011 at 12:01amYour definition is not accurate, because the sexual gratification of the viewer, not the subject is what makes it porn. If the people in the movie don’t really enjoy what they’re doing, but it looks like they do, it’s still porn. If they do enjoy it, but the resulting film is used only by doctors to educate people who are so uptight and ignorant that they can’t figure out how to do it without help – not porn.
Report Post »Bhaub
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:29pmSince we all embrace the libertarian ideals that all things should be free, there should be no filters on anything. The government shouldn’t be able to stop our children from seeing things. That sounds like Socialism or Communism.
Report Post »Steven63
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:41pmBhaub,
Where did you read that we all embrace the libertarian ideals that all things should be free? Did I miss that post/requirement when I signed in to post here??
Regardless, there are limits that a society should recognize and thus, impose rules for society to operate AS FREELY AS POSSIBLE without sacrificing those limits.
You want to view porn? Fine. Go home or to a strip bar or hire a ****** or whatever you want – our libertarian slanted minds won’t fault you. You want to subject MY KIDS your viewings? You’ve crossed the line there, bub.
Report Post »Zer0
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:43pm@BHAUB,
It is not the government’s job to stop YOUR children from seeing “things”, rather it is YOUR job to stop YOUR children from seeing “things”. I’d agree with you, but then we’d both be wrong….
Say “no” to nanny-statism!
Report Post »Bhaub
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:52pm@Steven63
Limiting freedom? That’s clearly socialism and communism. It‘s like telling our children that they can’t learn about Jesus just because we can teach that at home.
Zer0 is right! No nanny states! They shouldn’t block things our children can see- like Jesus’ glory?
Report Post »Zer0
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:34pm@BHAUB,
The Blaze or a poster “censored” my comment (What’s up with that? We’re Maoists here now?)! I’ll repost the Momon-approved version…
“Zer0 is right! No nanny states! They shouldn’t block things our children can see- like Jesus’ glory?”-lulz
Yes, yes indeed. Keep “J.C.” and mammary glands free!!! You are responsible for what your children digest, intellectually, not the government. I say “no” to Progressives AND Moral Authoritarians! :P
Report Post »Bhaub
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:43pm@Zer0
Someone censored the post here? It sounds like Soros has finally taken over The Blaze. Beck warned us about this. I’m going to pray about this so I can find a way for our posts to shine His glory through without government or LEFTIST intervention.
Report Post »Zer0
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:47pm@BHAUB,
iMas Lulzl!!
Report Post »Steven63
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:26pm@ Doc…
“Our FOUNDERS were “Liberals”, dimwit.”
1. So was the KKK
2. Resorting to namecalling is the hallmark calling card of the tolerant left.
3. Don’t be mad, Doc. We actually welcome you here unlike your friends at HuffPo (they hate ‘trolls’ and would rather not listen to alternative views). Besides, every court needs a jester and you make me laugh.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:07pmAnother meaningless bit of drivel….
the KKK were “LIBERALS”?
******, please……
Blackhawk1
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 5:10pmHey Doc you really need to know the facts of the KKK.
The Ku Klux Klan was established after Southern Democrats lost the Civil War to the Republican Party. They were thought of as the “militant arm” of the Democrat Party and sought to kill former Black slaves, Irish slaves, Oriental Slaves & the Republicans who freed them all. The late Senator Robert Byrd recruited for the KKK and was a Senator from West Virginia.
I know how you liberals just HATE facts.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 11:21pmBLACKHAWK1…
They were NOT “Liberals” in those days, dolt.
Ask an adult to read a BOOK to you ferchrissakes.
Report Post »Khthulhu
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:26pm@cognitivedissonance:
“filters block more than porn, many restricted websites have no pornographic content. Focusing on pornography in this case is a distortion of the facts. Yes filterless web use allows for the access of pornography, but filters block more than just porn.”
I guess it never occurred to you that porn sites actively research & use various programming techniques to find ways around web filters? Maybe those public libraries which have common sense and use the filters understand this and broaden the scope of the filter so as not to risk exposing children to that type of content. If your library is not allowing you to view adult content, go home and view it there. Very simple!!
Report Post »Let’s be honest. This argument really boils down to sex addicts who are too cheap to pay for internet porn and all the hardware/software necessary to view it, or can’t watch it at home because their spouse will leave them. Ones’ preference for that type of content in an environment where small children may be exposed to it is not a constitutionally guaranteed right. I support anyone’s God -given right to view that content in their home, not in my tax-funded library.
Kerri g
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:21pmAnd just why are libraries supposed to accomodate perverts? Anyone can rent a porn movie or buy a porn magazine so why require libraries to do this?
Report Post »gzwrbc
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:19pmI wish I could find the artical, but we had an incident in Maine a few years back when a Christian lady who owned a home for handicapped adults had first been forced by the state to provide porn to this group of people (it was a first amendment issue, you see), and eventually forced to close her doors. it will only get worse, i’m affraid.
Report Post »Steven63
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:18pm@ Doc…
“What “tax money” are you talking about?”
Obviously you don’t own a home, Doc. Whatsamatter? Section 8 don’t require you to pay taxes towards the libraries?
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:28pmI own FOUR, lightweight… and I’m willing to bet that I paid more taxes last year than your entire LIFETIME GROSS INCOME.
AVERAGE taxpayer contributes less than ELEVEN DOLLARS to Libraries.. the rest are through CONTRIBUTIONS.
Try another defection…. this one sucks.
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:05pm@doc
Honey the bank called again, were 1600 months late on our mortages and they are pissed
Love, Mrs Strangelove
Prove it, where are they, I want to see the deeds, show me your paperwork!
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:06pm@doc
When liberal trolls get cornered and riled up, they always resort to bragging about their income and material worth. Which is kind of ironic, ya think?
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 11:23pmTHERIGHTSOFBILLY..
Ask an adult to read the post I was RESPONDING TO, lightweight.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on April 16, 2011 at 12:52amTypical juvenile donkey.
Justify your own bad behavior by pointing at someone else and braying…….But he did it too
Featherweight
Go “impinge” on something or someone you ignoramus.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on April 16, 2011 at 12:55amIn case you could not figure it out, that was meant for you Strange Doctor Love
Report Post »Steven63
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:16pm@doc…
“Libraries are among the most effective of all public services,”
Did I just see a progressive admit most everything the government touches it doesn’t work?
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:26pmNo.
Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit, is it?
Report Post »Unbelievable
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:16pmOh HE77 NO!!! It’s bad enough our tax money went to produce porn through the stimulus scam.. no way in HE77 should we be funding porn through our public libraries. I can see it now… we allow our tax dollars to fund libraries when they allow perverts to view porn and we end up with child rapists doing their thing in our public libraries.
When is this madness going to end?!?!?!?
Report Post »Beyond
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:05pmWhy not put porn magazines next to the children’s books
Report Post »Oh, God!
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:18pmGood idea. Now would you recommend Debbie does Dallas next to Dick and Jane? :)
Report Post »workin4alivin
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:58pmwhy not, the gubment are badge wearing, card toting child molesters…. because Janet napolo-commie say they can.
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:07pmDrudge has a story on how the white house proposes that the DHS insure private computers remain net neutral.
Report Post »Chicago Ray
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:58pm“When Did Access To Porn Become A God-Given Right?”
In today’s full free fall near collapse society, that’s when…. :(
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:05pmWas that a trumpet I want to hear?
Report Post »beckwill
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:57pmAlso, Imagine the class of “patrons” this attracts. Who wants to take their child to the library while Homeless Hobo Hank gets his jollies on the porn sites. Eeewwww!
Report Post »PavZilla
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:03pmis it catalogued using the screwee decimal system?
Report Post »Oh, God!
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:56pmI don‘t think this was Franklin’s idea when he established the public library. This should not be available at all in the public library. For what reason? This type of stuff just sickens me. What kind of society have we become where people can view this type of stuff and think it is OK?
Report Post »beckwill
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:55pmSounds to me like the librarians have a little too much time on their hands. What’s next? Private rooms where “patrons” can go and “view” porn. It’s all too disgusting. There had better be some industrial strength sanitizer to use on the keyboards and mouse…if you know what I mean. Gross, I feel like I need a shower after just reading about it.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:59pmWhy would you care?
You’ve never entered a library in your life.
Detfan
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:17pmThe last three public libraries I walked into were cesspools of perverts and bums sleeping in the corners.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:31pmDETFAN…
I think you’re lying.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:57pm@DETFAN
You just happened to walk in to those libraries during the weekly SEIU meetings.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:54pmFirst of all, I challenge anyone here to DEFINE “porn” in any legal sense…. and secondly, “god” didn’t “give” anyone their rights… WE FOUGHT & DIED for them.
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:04pmGOD did give me my rights, and no, you, man may not remove them just because you hate GOD.
Report Post »What arrogance.
Sam Brown
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:06pmChild porn, are you all for that? There is a point where people shouldn’t have to define what is bad, you should know what is bad. Sick.
Sammy
Report Post »Steven63
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:11pmYour Rights came from God; ineherent to your being born and not ‘made’ by a government entity…you fight to protect and keep them…not to gain them, and usually you fight against somebody (a government) hell bent on taking them from you.
As far as a definition of porn: I know it when I see it and don’t make me describe it in this public forum what it is just for your personal enjoyment.
Report Post »Inuyasha
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:11pmMy rights did not come from fighting, the freedom to enjoy those rights did. There is a difference. My rights and your rights both come from God. You can deny it if you want to, but that doesn’t change it.
Report Post »Detfan
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:13pmWhat a moron docstranglove is. Like nobody knows pornography when they seeit. What a pin head!!
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:13pmBETTERDAYS…
Pap.. and who is trying to “take them away” from you???
Try another strawman.. this one sucks as much as your retrograde worldview.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:15pmOh, Sammy…. nobody is advocating for child porn an you KNOW it… but there have been MANY religious NEANDERTHALS that have burned books as being “porn” simply because it has sex in them.
Besides… this is a NON-ISSUE as those sites are blocked.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:22pmSTEVEN63…
My rights came from an enlightened group of PATRIOTS who sacrificed their lives in order that we ALL have them.
god had nothing to do with it.
Report Post »Sam Brown
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:29pmDoc, I defined porn just like you asked. If you have tried to view child porn and found out there were filters that block you then you have a sickness. Seek help before you get some jail time with bubba.
Sammy
Report Post »Inuyasha
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:30pmYou think that the founders gave us our rights? You sir, are the dimwit. They fought so that we can have access to these rights. They did not fight to create these rights. Yes, they were enlightened . . . enlightened to the fact that they saw we (all mankind) has these rights given to us upon creation. They fought against those who suppressed those rights. It really is not that hard to understand the difference between the two, unless you are purposefully in denial. I have explained it two ways to make it easy for you to digest.
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:32pm@doc
Lucifer is that you?
Report Post »Sam Brown
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:40pmHey doc, would those men have made their sacrifice if they talked to you first? LOL God will explain things to you in due time, enjoy LOL
Sammy
Report Post »Juris
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:55pm‘the average person, applying contemporary community standards’ would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest . . .; (b) . . . the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) . . . the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 24, 37 L. Ed. 2d 419, 93 S. Ct. 2607 (1973).
Read the Declaration if you think your rights come from men. The justification for liberty is that they do not.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:08pmSammy, Sammy, Sammy….
You defined NOTHING (other than your unfortunate limitations)…
And your putrid assertion that … “If you have tried to view child porn and found out there were filters that block you then you have a sickness..” is LAUGHABLE.
One doesn’t need to cut a FINGER off to know that it is PAINFUL… and banning “child porn” is a NO BRAINER (even for someone as restricted as you).
Report Post »chips1
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 9:59pmDefinition:
Report Post »Porn…… The act of posting a picture of Michelle.
DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 11:25pmCHIPS1….
BACHMANN?
You bet.
Report Post »nacilbuper
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:53pmAgain, world end… Need I say more…
Report Post »Sam Brown
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:52pmProgressives will never stop their corruption of our culture and they even make us pay for our own corruption with our tax money.
Sammy
Report Post »cognitivedissonance
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:52pmFilters don’t simply block pornography, they block sites that are deemed offensive or unsuitable for children, which is a pretty broad range of sites that may be blocked.
Often times blocking software restricts access to sites that may use adult language or deal with subject matter that is not suitable for children, even if the information does not have pornographic content.
Report Post »teachermitch32
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:08pmYea, yea! We read your earlier post. Posting it twice does not make it more readily understood. You seem to have alot of experience with this subject about fliters at libraries. Is that where you are posting from right now? No porn on government property, especially in libraries, and NOT with my dollars. If that means filters, however imperfect, then so be it.
Report Post »cognitivedissonance
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:33pmI didn’t intend to post twice, I actually made this post before the other one and it didn’t show up so I assumed it was lost and reposted, my bad.
Anyhow, my point is, this issue goes beyond pornography, often times internet filters block content based on odd criteria or according to the biases of the people who create the software.
From wikipedia: Many types of content-control software have been shown to block sites based on the religious and political leanings of the company owners. Examples include blocking several religious sites (including the Web site of the Vatican), many political sites, and sites about gay/lesbians. X-Stop was shown to block sites such as the Quaker web site, the National Journal of Sexual Orientation Law, the Heritage Foundation, and parts of The Ethical Spectacle. CYBERsitter blocks out sites like National Organization for Women. Nancy Willard, an academic researcher and attorney, reported on the close relationships between conservative Christian organizations and filtering software companies providing filters in U.S. public schools and libraries. From her review of publicly available documentation, she concluded that seven of the filtering software companies were blocking Web sites based on religious or other inappropriate bias. They may block sites about things like birth control, drug use and date rape.
Report Post »NSDQ
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:51pmLiberalism is a mental disorder and this is a prime demonstration.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:02pmFatuous winger nincompoopery.
Our FOUNDERS were “Liberals”, dimwit.
Report Post »Average_JoeMN
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:11pm@DocStrangelove
The only “dimwit” is a person who thinks our Founding Fathers would favor free and open porn in a gov’t paid library.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:16pmAVERAGE_JOEMN..
DESCRIBE “porn”.
Report Post »MOTHERSMITH
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:19pmI see we have new trolls here at the Blaze. Troll tactic: When a troll can’t win an arguement on fact or merit, resort to name calling. Just ignore it NSDQ, it isn’t worth your time.
Please remember, DON’T FEED THE TROLLS!
Report Post »DR STRANGE LOVEs NURSE
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:23pmDOC..even nurses know that liberal then and now are 2 different things. I think your presentism is gettin’ the best of you there. Try lookin‘ that up if you don’t know what it means. We had to learn that in nursing school day 2. You really are quite strange.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:24pmMOTHERSMITH…
“Liberalism is a mental disorder….”
THAT is what you call an “argument”?
Physician, heal thyself.
Report Post »Professional Infidel
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:37pmThe 50′s is when I was a pre-teen.
Report Post »Juris
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:47pm@docstrangelove
porn: ‘the average person, applying contemporary community standards’ would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest . . .; (b) . . . the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) . . . the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 24, 37 L. Ed. 2d 419, 93 S. Ct. 2607 (1973).
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:56pmJURIS…
That STILL has to bee INTERPRETED on an INDIVIDUAL BASIS as it is 100% SUBJECTIVE.
Report Post »Juris
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:10pm@doc
Guessing you’re not a lawyer. That is a direct quote of the US Supreme Court, objectively defining pornography. You lose.
Report Post »NSDQ
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 4:34pmGood job Juris, see how BROKER ..ahem I mean DSL shrinks from facts.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 11:19pmJURIS…
It STILL needs individual interpretation, and I dare you to prove otherwise.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 11:50pmJuris
‘the average person, applying contemporary community standards’
The internet has shown that this kind of definition is based on a fallacy. Community standards are a fantasy not a reality. When porn goes everywhere, it is watched everywhere. If there is no such thing as a community where there is not a large percentage of the populace watching porn, then there is no such thing as a community that has a genuine standard that would not permit them to do so.
Report Post »Juris
Posted on April 16, 2011 at 11:16amI didn’t make the law, SCOTUS did. You argue that a law that requires individual application is invalid. The fallacy of your argument is so obvious it doesn’t even merit rebuttal. What law doesn’t require individual application? I’ll put it in terms you can understand. If one guy speeds, he’s subject to the penalty. That’s an individual application. The penalty is set by the legislature, which is elected by the community. Therefore, the penalty is a community standard (that definition I gave you has been codified, by the way). I don’t really care whether you disagree with its reasonableness. That would be subjective. Get it? Probably not.
Report Post »Mannax
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:49pmIf you want porn, go make your own or get a job so you can afford to watch it. Don’t use my tax money like that.
Report Post »vennoye
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:53pmAmen!!!
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:53pmWhat “tax money” are you talking about?
Report Post »cognitivedissonance
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:55pmfilters block more than porn, many restricted websites have no pornographic content.
Focusing on pornography in this case is a distortion of the facts. Yes filterless web use allows for the access of pornography, but filters block more than just porn.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:56pmAgreed, use their own home PC to do so, keep it away from me in the public.
Report Post »Blackhawk1
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 1:57pmOh great first the Teachers Union insists that taxpayers pay for their Viagra and now we have to pay for their porn too! What next? Prostitutes!!!!!!
Report Post »teachermitch32
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:03pm@DocStrangelove,
Excuse me? Are you serious? No where in this article have libraries been refered to as “private” libraries. The ones being refered to are Gov. libraries. Hence, supported by tax payer dollars.
You, as an obvious troll, have stretched your arguments to the breaking point….referring to comments here and on other posts. Bye-bye now!
Report Post »Mike Opelka
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:04pmTax money does support libraries. Federal, state and local monies all in various amounts are part of what keeps local libraries open. So yes, tax money is being used here.
Khthulhu
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:09pmI agree. Since when is it a God given right to watch porn? These libs are such numb nuts.
Report Post »DocStrangelove
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:10pmTEACHERMITCH32….
{{{{{groan}}}}}
Libraries are among the most effective of all public services, serving more than 2/3 of the public with less than 2 percent of all tax dollars. Nationally, the average cost to the taxpayer for access to this wide range of public-library resources is $11 a year, about the cost of one hardcover book.
Report Post »Detfan
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:10pmDoctorstranglove, all the taxes that pay for libraries
Report Post »NOBALONEY
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:16pmWe’ve gone from brown paper wrapping,under the counter, to free access in a public library. Yet, we have a xxx domain on the internet. This is one mixed up, confusing society we are living in!
Report Post »CatB
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:20pm@MANNAX
Well SAID!
Report Post »DR STRANGE LOVEs NURSE
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:22pmI didn‘t want to say anything but I saw DRSTRANGE talkin’ to Jesse Jackson on the phone the other day at the office. He really is quite strange !!!!!!!
Report Post »Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:23pm@DOCSTRANGELOVE
Report Post »Still, it is public funds, no matter how you trivialize it and anyone who pays taxes has the right to complain. Perhaps you are one of the people who don’t pay taxes, but live off of those who do. Is that why you trivialize?
HillBillySam1
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:30pmWhen I pay my property taxes and for my yearly fees on my license plate tags, both of them have an added tax for our county libraries……it isn’t just Federal tax dollars being spent for access to pornography in our public libraries……
Report Post »JD Carp
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:34pmThis is not a God given right! These machines come from my tax dollars. You want porn get your own machine!
Report Post »Marylou7
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:34pmIf we don‘t get these marxist out of our lives God is going to rain down fire on us and I’m not joking. PORN??? Are these people that stupid. Something has to be done to get these porn loving, baby killing, human loathing marxist out of our government and out of our lives. Mary Moroney should be fired on the spot.
Report Post »Professional Infidel
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:37pmPorn in the library?? if you cant make retro back to the 50′s, then why NOW???
Report Post »the_ancient
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:46pmIf you want to read a book, or access the net get a job and pay for it, dont use my tax dollars for it.
This whole story skips over the bigger problem, why is the federal government spending money on libraries to begin with?? That is not a constitutionally authorized program and federal funding for libraries should be stopped
Report Post »Kasman
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 2:46pmMy 2 Cents……
P0rn surfing on the internet is not a right. However, allowing the “filtering” of internet content can start us down that very dangerous slope….
First – It is an unfortunate fact that NO filter is perfect or even remotely dependable when it comes to computers and the internet. “Crap” will sometimes make it thru the most strict of filters…
Second – Exactly WHO is deciding WHAT to filter ??? -> Do you want some mentally defective Liberal/Progressive/DummyCrat deciding to filter anything “conservative”, and by allowing that, depriving your children, friends, family, neighbors…….from the real world truths that are never reported in ANY newspaper or televised news program, but can only be found by doing alot of research on the internet ??????
While I don’t think kids need to be surfing p0rn on the net, only the Parent should be able to decide what their child can or can not see, learn, read, absorb….
Just my couple penny’s …..
Report Post »ManThong
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:05pmThe right to free speech and the examination of erotic expressions thereof in almost any perverted and salacious way conceivable is engrained in the documents that are the foundation of this great country.
The libraries should construct viewing booths around the computer stations. They should also consider small, private group viewing rooms to accommodate in depth review and interaction between researchers of this important educational and art medium. This would provide needed local employment as well as privacy for the porn acedemians and patrons.
People need to get over their old prudish prejudices and embrace the fundamental transformation of the new, progressive America.
Report Post »VegasGuy
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:15pmI agree with Mannax. Next they will want the libraries to provide private viewing rooms with free beer and Cheetos.
Report Post »logictrumps
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:24pmBrought to you by the same types that want to give free internet access to every poor person in America. We the taxpayers will foot the bill for section 8 housing to view free porn and then the porn companies will set up false merchant accounts to charge EBT / welfare cards for some lovin.
Report Post »No1YaKnow
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 3:58pmUmm…porn is not free public information. In fact—their whole marketing method consists of providing a few free minutes of it to then say “to see more, pay more!”. Ummm….not free information, and libraries shouldn’t be required to open up access to it. Internet is NOT a right, so I think it falls into that category. Keeping in mind though…we have some slimy politicians working hard to ensure that it IS a right. See below…
Report Post »http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2011/04/tim-berners-lee.html
exdem
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 4:16pmThis is just great. A child was raped in a public library in my state by a convicted sex offender in the childrens reading section while mom was only a few feet away. And now we want to encourage the freaks. Our country has gone mad.
Report Post »ozchambers
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 4:17pmThe filtering of information to the public by the government is not a simple issue. I think porn is harmful to the public in general, but I am not comfortable in having the government decide what is harmful for EVERYONE even if I happen to agree.
Report Post »ManThong
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 4:17pmDon’t forget all the essential accoutrements for exhaustive examination of the subject material; liquid, latex, mechanical etc.
Oh, and modified power tools for the Northwestern University students.
Finally, change we can believe in for our tax dollars.
Report Post »restorehope
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 4:26pmAnything that is enjoyed by sexual predators of children should not be allowed on a library computer….regardless of the freedom of speech argument. Porn stimulates and motivates those that prey of children so why make it easy for them to do so? It comes down to common sense, something that the ACLU lacks in a big way. If non-predators want to stimulate themselves with porn, then do so in the privacy of their own homes….not sitting in a library surrounded by others (including children).
Report Post »GETLIFE
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 5:34pmI like the “…adequate” (access to hard-core porn). By all means , make sure it’s adequate! If not, well…the unsatisfied porn researcher might wander over to the kiddie section?
Report Post »GETLIFE
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 5:39pmILOVESECTION8BLAHBLAHBLAH person: How is it I just can’t imagine you are a paid troll?
Report Post »ConsiderThis
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 6:31pmPorn in public libraries!
Report Post »That’s disgusting!
Is there no end to what these Progressives will do?
jackrorabbit
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 10:38pmPersonally, I don’t like the idea, but if the “computer” was in a closed room, and they weren’t doing anything “Pee Wee Hermany”(which would be illegal), then the first amendment backs their rights. It is a tough thing to be in a society without morals, and continue to hold the line on free speech, especially in the digital age. I asked myself what would Franklin say(after telling them that it was immoral). I cannot prove it, but I would wager that he would loan the book out, if he had it to loan, but of course he wouldn’t, or would he?
Report Post »NutterButter79
Posted on April 15, 2011 at 11:17pmBetter bring some disinfectant wipes to the library….why are these keys so sticky?
Report Post »Arlee
Posted on April 16, 2011 at 8:53am@DOCSTRANGELOVE
Your assertion that the library only costs each citizen $11 a year is incorrect I believe. My property tax bill allots $150 to our local libraries. Split that between my husband and I and that’s $75 each. Then take into account that the library is also federally funded and that 47% of our citizens don’t pay taxes at all.
On another note, libraries have had filters from the very beginning. Originally, they were the people who decided what books they should stock/ buy. Then came magazines, then books on tape, then music, videos, then the Internet came along. Just because the Internet is free to view everything once you have access doesn’t mean that everything is worth viewing. And I should think that the library should be a safe place for our children and continue to hold true to the original intent which was to give people access to knowledge, education and information that might otherwise be prohibitive to them due to economic circumstances.
Report Post »Arlee
Posted on April 16, 2011 at 9:05amI’m also just curious………., can anyone give a reason why the government needs to offer access to porn on the internet to its citizens via tax payer dollars? What purpose could that serve? It’s available to those who can pay, so why the need to make it available to those who can’t pay? What greater good does that serve?
Report Post »LinP
Posted on April 16, 2011 at 1:10pmThis battle has been going on for 15 years. It is just plain crazy to put porn in the category
Report Post »of free speech. Have any of you seen what children can access at the public library?
It is a crime against children. Shame on the ACLU and the ALA.
They are despicable.
SWFLA
Posted on April 16, 2011 at 9:58pm@Congnitive: You want to watch porn on the computer. Go buy your own computer. I don’t see in the Constitution where access to the internet or porn are guaranted as unalienable rights.
Report Post »