FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB General Discussion Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 08:25 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-12-2003, 07:59 PM   #1
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Richmond, Virginia
Posts: 422
Default Libraries Forced to Filter

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/6253239.htm

Basicly, any library which accepts federal funds must install porn-blocking software. Furthermore, the Supreme Court said this law is completely constitutional!

I can't underestand the argument parent groups are trying to make. If you do not have internet at home, most libraries have computers in set up for children to use. And the argument that libraries refuse printed pornographic material and therfore must block websites is rather weak. Books and magazines cost money, and the taxpayers have a right not to pay for them. Yet viewing pornography on the internet caries with it no cost to the government.
Nikolai is offline  
Old 07-12-2003, 08:23 PM   #2
Obsessed Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Not Mayaned
Posts: 96,752
Default Re: Libraries Forced to Filter

Quote:
Originally posted by Nikolai
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/6253239.htm

Basicly, any library which accepts federal funds must install porn-blocking software. Furthermore, the Supreme Court said this law is completely constitutional!

I can't underestand the argument parent groups are trying to make. If you do not have internet at home, most libraries have computers in set up for children to use. And the argument that libraries refuse printed pornographic material and therfore must block websites is rather weak. Books and magazines cost money, and the taxpayers have a right not to pay for them. Yet viewing pornography on the internet caries with it no cost to the government.
Because those prudes in Washington want it that way.

Incidently, the local library does carry Playboy. It's only available from the counter--but so are several others whose contents aren't remotely offensive. (Things like Consumer Reports.)
Loren Pechtel is offline  
Old 07-12-2003, 08:33 PM   #3
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1
Default

I read that much of the decision was based on the premise that filters can be turned on and off, when such a feature does not exist.

I've always felt it's not the responsibility of the library to decide people's (or people's children's) morals. One's art is another's pornography. And to single out the internet, when libraries offer books on sex and even publications like Playboy/girl, is even more harmful because filters block genuine and important information (think of how many non-pornographic topics arise from the word "breast").

What irks me the most are the people who complain, the parents whose children are exposed to pornography. It seems to me that unless you type explicit sexual phrases into a search engine, you aren't going to find anything. And bringing in filters seems to suggest parents don't have to watch their children at the library, that it's a safe haven. I think not. The library is a public place where anyone can mingle freely.

So anyways, I'm displeased with the decision.
oompa_radar is offline  
Old 07-12-2003, 10:14 PM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Heaven
Posts: 6,980
Default

Actually, if you misspell a word, you can get OODLES of porn on a net seach. I was searching for information on the southeast-asian school system and typed in schoosl instead of schools. Lotsa porn in with a few legit sites. Fixed the spelling, no porn at all.
Jesus Tap-Dancin' Christ is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:11 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.