In general I would agree, but this law doesn't stop at porn. None of them have stopeed at porn, they go farther, they block use information regarding health and the body, religious information, and standard world history.
They would also block art work that is displayed in many museums that your child goes on a field trip to see. This is a library, they store all the information worth having, information, many things are there that children shouldn't see. But this is helped with proper supervision by the parents and the librarians. In many places kids aren't allowed to use the same computers that adults use, and adults can't fit at the computers the kids use. If people at the library keep an eye on things, and see that I guy is looking at porn right out in public then they should ask him to not do that, as I am pretty sure most counties have some decency regulations that would have something to say about that. But what it comes down to in my mind, Content Filtering software doesn't do a very good job at all. It blocks site that are perfectly useful, they should be used by parents for their children in their person homes. I don't want my tax dollars going to pay for software that doesn't do a good job, this causes the library to be less useful to the public. I don't want people to look at porn at the library, but I also don't want my tax dollars purposly keeping people from getting to information they should be able to get at the public library. If it were as simple as blocking Porn, and lets define porn, if playboy porn? I don't think it is, but some would disagree. Is page 3 of the Sun "newspaper" porn, I don't think so; but again others would see it as such. Playboy magazine can have useful information, like interveiws with people that could be used in a reseach paper. Should these site be blocked? I say no, should www.funkybuttlovin.com be blocked? Well then the question becomes does blocking that site keep people from performing an assignment? Maybe, if I have a research assignment on making money on the Internet, It might be useful to look up the adult website industry to see how those companies have done it. However with this software I cannot do that. So that lays out my opinion on the subject, anybody who disagrees, well your wrong ;) > -----Original Message----- > From: Howie Hamlin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 12:47 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: First Amendment Wins Again > > > My point was that a library does not store pornographic > materials. I pay for my library through taxes. Just as we > don't spend tax dollars on filling the library shelves with > porn we should not provide access to porn either. What if > all the machines are tied up with porno surfers while others > can't do legitimate research? What if my kid is walking by a > machine that has porn on the screen? I'm sorry, but my taxes > should not be used for this nonsense. > > Maybe all libraries should have a separate porn room for that > kind of thing but leave the rest of us out of it. > > Howie > ______________________________________________________________________ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
