[ought-six]

You don't understand my point at all, as you are looking at it through blinders. I am against GOVERNMENTAL censorship. I have said, on many occasions, that I would have no problem with installing filters on computers that are restricted to children's use. I have a major problem with filters on any computer that is available to an adult. My point is that once you start putting filters on library computers, it will be hard to stop them from being put on all of them. Where you may want to restrict access to pornography, some nanny-stater on a library commission may want to restrict access to religious materials, since an argument can be made that on public property (such as a public library) it violates the "establishment" clause of the First Amendment (the ACLU's favorite argument, which I, personally, think does not in any way refelct the original meaning and intent of the First Amendment, but you see where I'm going with this). Do you really want to go there?

[Always Right]

You don't understand my point at all, as you are looking at it through blinders. I am against GOVERNMENTAL censorship.

You really don't get it. This has NOTHING, repeat NOTHING, repeat ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, to do with GOVERNMENTAL censorship. This is about empowering the PARENT with the choice. The government lets the PARENT decide if their child can or can not acess pornographic material. Right now the government is empowering the child to decide against the wishes of the vast majority of parents.