Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Town Refuses to Ask Citizens If Library Porn Should Be Filtered Out - Please Help Us!
Plan2Succeed.org ^ | 22 Dec 2003 | Plan2Succeed.org

Posted on 12/31/2003 1:58:40 AM PST by plan2succeed.org

Town Refuses to Ask Citizens If Library Porn Should Be Filtered Out; Plan2Succeed.org Seeking Pro Bono Counsel.


Something is wrong when a small group of people called a Library Board of Trustees determines that a public library must continue to allow access to pornography despite admittedly being outside the library's mission, the Township Committee claims it is powerless to stop the Board, and the citizens have no say.

(Excerpt) Read more at plan2succeed.org ...


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Government
KEYWORDS: 1984; bigbrother; boardoftrustees; bookburning; censorship; farenheit451; filtering; filters; firstamendment; goosesteppingmorons; internetfilters; library; libraryboard; nannystate; neoconnazis; orwellian; pornography; publiclibrary; towncouncil; townshipcommittee
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320 ... 461-468 next last
To: Amelia
In other words, if the ALA doesn't endorse filtering software, it's actively encouraging children to view porn?

No. I am saying the ALA is against filtering software AND is encouraging children to view pornographic material via its own policies. Surely, you do not believe otherwise?

So let's turn our parenting responsibilities over to the government, in the form of the public library? Again, what a liberal concept!

So you insist on taking the Pollyanic approach.

Saying parents should take 100% of the responsibility regarding what kids see and hear while those who create the stuff one may see and hear bear none of it is patently absurd on every level.

I am sure you have heard of Derek Humphrey's book, Final Exit and the infamous Hit-Man case. Those are but two examples of how we are and should be held responsible for the things we do and say. After all, the First Amendment does say "free speech," but not free speech with impunity.

281 posted on 01/01/2004 2:26:51 PM PST by Houmatt (Pray for Terri Schindler!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
Excuse me while I spit out the words you keep trying to stuff in my mouth.

No, I am not trying to do any such thing. Fact is, you refuse to answer even the simplest of questions, opting instead to sidestep. I asked you if children you have open access to material of a patently obscene nature (in this case, coprophilia). You would not even respond to that.

One would think if one was against that, they would hesitate in an eye's twinkle to say NO. But you did not do that. You gave no answer at all. So what is one supposed to believe, other than that you indeed want children to have open access to material of a patently obscene nature? In fact, you still have yet to say otherwise, let alone prove it, as has been requested.

No, I am not putting words in your mouth. I don't need to. Your behavior is doing all of your talking for you.

282 posted on 01/01/2004 2:37:41 PM PST by Houmatt (Pray for Terri Schindler!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: Houmatt
So what is one supposed to believe . . .

Believe what you want. I believe you are hung up on this coprophilia thing and it effected how you were potty-trained. Maybe I'm wrong. Just like you're wrong in what you believe about me.

I will not support you or anyone else who attempts to put filters on the internet in my public library. Believe it.

283 posted on 01/01/2004 2:52:01 PM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
Just like you're wrong in what you believe about me.

Then prove it.

284 posted on 01/01/2004 3:01:29 PM PST by Houmatt (Pray for Terri Schindler!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: Houmatt
I am saying the ALA is against filtering software AND is encouraging children to view pornographic material via its own policies. Surely, you do not believe otherwise?

Actually, I do believe otherwise. I can believe the ALA is against filtering software, but I do not believe it is encouraging children to view pornographic material and you have shown no evidence that it is.

So you insist on taking the Pollyanic approach.

No, I insist on taking the conservative approach, which is that I have responsibility for supervising my own children, and I shouldn't expect the government to do it for me.

Saying parents should take 100% of the responsibility regarding what kids see and hear while those who create the stuff one may see and hear bear none of it is patently absurd on every level.

I don't think the libraries are the ones creating the stuff.

I am sure you have heard of Derek Humphrey's book, Final Exit and the infamous Hit-Man case.

Actually, no I haven't. I haven't heard of Derek Humphrey either.

285 posted on 01/01/2004 3:06:58 PM PST by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: Houmatt
I should have said you're probably wrong in what you believe about me.

Heck, I don't know, you may believe that I have not quit beating my spouse. How do I prove a negative?

What do you want from me? I've told you I don't favor filters on internet stations in my public libraries. Does that mean I don't want kids looking at T&A? I guess so. I've raised three boys to adulthood in the burbs of DC and they seemed to have turned out ok. I hope you've had or are having the same success.

286 posted on 01/01/2004 3:11:41 PM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
Because the kind of pornography we're talking about was illegal for the first - say 175 years - of the existence of this nation.
287 posted on 01/01/2004 3:45:11 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: bluefish; sfRummygirl
How about this one:

"If men will not be governed by the Ten Commandments, they shall be governed by the ten thousand commandments."

--G. K. Chesterton


In general, I agree with much of what you say. The difficulty is that government must needs be - due to the nature of humankind - a suppressor of wrong. On the local level, LEOs arrest those who have committed crimes. If this did not happen, those with criminal mentality would oppress the innocent. So government is a necessity. The discussion is then what is the proper purview of government? To take a libertarian view that we really only need government for defending our shores is a utopian, immature vision that does not take into account the reality of human nature.

I highly recommend Robert Bork's book "Slouching Towards Gomorrah". He brings up the very topic we are all discussing here with great insight as well as historical perspective. I'm sure no one would will agree with everything he says 100% but he is a very conservative intellect, and well worth reading.

He explains why taking "personal freedom" to the limit creates chaos, which then leads to extremely repressive government.
288 posted on 01/01/2004 3:54:23 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
I will not support you or anyone else who attempts to put filters on the internet in my public library.

Oh, you have your own personal public library, now nice! And therefore you get total control over it, wow. So logically it must mean that you have paid for it without anyone else's tax money, just yours, since your say-so is the only one that counts. I guess leadpenny's personal (although public...?) library that can have pornography freely available is another "right" found somewhere in the Constitution.

289 posted on 01/01/2004 3:59:46 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
In general, I agree with much of what you say. The difficulty is that government must needs be - due to the nature of humankind - a suppressor of wrong. On the local level, LEOs arrest those who have committed crimes. If this did not happen, those with criminal mentality would oppress the innocent. So government is a necessity. The discussion is then what is the proper purview of government?

Congress has passed the Protection of Children on the Internet Act, which says that all libraries receiving federal funds must install filtering software. Adults should be allowed to bypass the software.

Do you think that Congress, by passing this law, has enlarged the Federal government, or do you believe that the contents of a local library should be decided by the local people?

Do you think that local libraries should be receiving Federal moneys in the first place?

290 posted on 01/01/2004 4:37:50 PM PST by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
I can believe the ALA is against filtering software, but I do not believe it is encouraging children to view pornographic material and you have shown no evidence that it is.

Oh, dear. You are rather ignorant, aren't you? Have a look at what someone else had to say on the subject, and what they found.

No, I insist on taking the conservative approach, which is that I have responsibility for supervising my own children, and I shouldn't expect the government to do it for me.

I don't think the libraries are the ones creating the stuff.

So you actually believe you can watch your kid 24/7? Reminds me of a Styx tune..."You're fooling yourself, and you won't believe it...." How about trying a realistic approach and admit there will be days when your child will be in the hands of others and they will be responsible for the things they do.

Unless you have no plans on letting them leave the house until they are 18.

291 posted on 01/01/2004 4:45:48 PM PST by Houmatt (Pray for Terri Schindler!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
Congress has passed the Protection of Children on the Internet Act, which says that all libraries receiving federal funds must install filtering software. Adults should be allowed to bypass the software.

My understanding is that federal monies are being recklessly and unconsitutionally spent. Libraries should not be recieving federal monies in the first place. But since they regrettably are, then there need to be things like the Act mentioned above.

Do you think that Congress, by passing this law, has enlarged the Federal government, or do you believe that the contents of a local library should be decided by the local people?

Well, by passing this law, Congress has enlarged the Federal government, but it's kind of like - if you buy the car, you buy the tires too. So now since libraries receive the fed money, they have to have some rules about how the money is spent.

But whatever the Fed rules about protecting children from porn, if local communities want to increase the level of protection, fine. Decrease it - no way. I mentioned my solutions up the thread - NO federal money. Total local control. Much better idea, and constitutional into the bargain.

Do you think that local libraries should be receiving Federal moneys in the first place?

In a word, no. I am not a libertarian, but I consider that the federal government (what to speak of states) should and could reduce spending by at the very least 50% and everyone would be better off.

292 posted on 01/01/2004 4:56:38 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: milan
Thank you for your response. I do not want to pay taxes for others--adults or child--to have acress to porn. There is no "right" to view porn. If, however, in a private place someone chooses to view porn and not bother anyone else nor claim anyone else's money to help then, then go ahead.
293 posted on 01/01/2004 5:14:17 PM PST by Ruth A.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Houmatt
So you actually believe you can watch your kid 24/7? Reminds me of a Styx tune..."You're fooling yourself, and you won't believe it...." How about trying a realistic approach and admit there will be days when your child will be in the hands of others and they will be responsible for the things they do.

My oldest is in her 30s and my youngest is in high school. How about yours?

I will tell you that when they were small I didn't leave them in public places (including the library) unattended. I had them; they were my responsibility, not someone else's.

If you want to believe, as Hillary does, that the "village" is responsible for raising your children, fine. I never believed that, and I don't now.

294 posted on 01/01/2004 5:26:00 PM PST by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
Please show me where the ALA endorses kids being freely allowed to view porn in libraries.

The ALA recommends sites to kids that are pornographic. The Go Ask ALice which ALA links kids to, discusses 'safe' rimming, fisting and many other inappropriate topics.

295 posted on 01/01/2004 5:26:23 PM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
mentioned my solutions up the thread - NO federal money. Total local control. Much better idea, and constitutional into the bargain.

I like that idea.

296 posted on 01/01/2004 5:58:32 PM PST by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
The ALA recommends sites to kids that are pornographic. The Go Ask ALice which ALA links kids to, discusses 'safe' rimming, fisting and many other inappropriate topics.

The page says it was begun for college students, and now serves students of high school and college ages, and young adults.

I read a bit of it, and while it does deal with a number of sexual topics - including alternatives to actually "having sex", I'm not sure I'd classify it as pornographic. I think that one problem people here would have with the site attempts to be "non-judgemental" and most of us would prefer more morality thrown in.

I don't know that the site is any more graphic than what the kids discuss among themselves, however, and at least it seems factual.

297 posted on 01/01/2004 6:05:58 PM PST by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
I will tell you that when they were small I didn't leave them in public places (including the library) unattended. I had them; they were my responsibility, not someone else's.

But you left them at school, right? One of them is still in high school, by your own admission. And when you take them to that school, you leave them in the care of someone else, right? You know, last month I was at the public library and saw two classes getting a tour as part of a field trip. I'm sure your kid went on those.

Don't play games with me. If your youngest is not at least 18 years of age, s/he is still a minor who should not be looking at adult or obscene material. Period. And unless you are looking over their shoulder whenever they are using the library computer at their current age you can stop the Barbra Streisand right now.

You are not 100% responsible for your kids because you cannot be. You cannot be with them 100% unless you have them surgically attached.

298 posted on 01/01/2004 6:17:35 PM PST by Houmatt (Pray for Terri Schindler!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: alexandria
Alexandria: Your experience with WebSENSE may be valuable in this thread. We look forward to hearing more from you on this. Now, as to "I wonder if there is a way to run a check on students, who unlike moi might have a DSL or cable connection, to see if they are exploiting the filter this way," let us take some guesses. The netstat command can be used to determine and/or monitor the status of network connections. Assuming you are a school administrator, you can determine what network commands are normal for your environment. Then you can watch for anomalous connections. Or another approach is if you have a proxy server or some way to detect what web sites people go to, see if you can detect anomalous patterns. We are not experts, but we'll bet there are ways to do this. Keyboard sniffers maybe?

By the way, we know of schools that have filters that are not really effective at all, but we believe that may be the result of pilot error. Can you share some experiences with us FReepers? One of us actually quit teaching in a school that had inadequate filters because the youngsters were accessing porn and he did not want to be involved in that, and efforts to improve the filters went unheeded.
299 posted on 01/01/2004 6:36:00 PM PST by plan2succeed.org
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: Houmatt
Don't play games with me.

You know, I think it is a game with you. It certainly isn't a discussion.

I believe the public library should be locally controlled, and should comply with local standards. I don't know what part of that you have a problem with.

300 posted on 01/01/2004 6:36:13 PM PST by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320 ... 461-468 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson