HERBIE1 Posted April 27, 2011 Posted April 27, 2011 (edited) What about it? If you, as an adult, want to surf porn on your laptop at Starbucks then go for it. What rules would you like to see enacted? How about this? Stunningly simple- NO PORN IN A PUBLIC LIBRARY. What would you say if Starbucks set a policy that forbid porn in their stores? Is that infringing on someone's rights, or simply a place of business establishing rules and a code of conduct for customers? There comes a point when parents have to be parents. Sometimes, that requires explaining sex to your kids. Sometimes, that requires explaining that there are some really weird people out there. Sometimes, that requires explaining the difference between right and wrong. Why is it suddenly the library's responsibility to protect kids? Yep, and as a parent, I see no reason why I should have to worry about what my child might see in a public library. Last time I checked, the library was about lending books, doing research, offering a quiet place to study, and yes, in recent years, use the internet- primarily to conduct searches for information. If you want to check out porn, do it in the privacy of your own home, not in a PUBLIC library. Sorry folks, but someone's alleged "rights" end as soon as they infringe on mine- or those of my children. ...edited because I screwed up the quotes... Edited April 27, 2011 by HERBIE1
paramedicmike Posted April 27, 2011 Posted April 27, 2011 So you're ok with limiting adults access to legal material in a library funded by public dollars? So what's next? Barry Manilow songs as Lone Star joked? It's a public institution supported by tax dollars. Legally available information whether it be smut or the web site to a local human resources office should not, and according to the article in the OP cannot, be limited. Your Starbucks comparison is apples and oranges. Starbucks, as a business, is free to limit access in any way they see fit. Investors and corporate executives are free to limit anything they want. Starbucks stores are not a public space. They are private store fronts that allow relatively public access. If the property owner decides to throw you out you have no recourse no matter if your activities are legal or not. The public library, on the other hand, is public property and is available to the entire public. Short of putting kids in a bubble and locking them in the basement parents are not going to protect them from everything. There are many, plenty, of learning opportunities out there. What kids may or may not see in a public library is only a small example. Your rights do not include a right to be free from offense. That's one of the challenges of an open society. What offends one person will not offend another. Just because someone is offended does not, and should not, limit one's access to otherwise legal material.
HERBIE1 Posted April 27, 2011 Posted April 27, 2011 So you're ok with limiting adults access to legal material in a library funded by public dollars? So what's next? Barry Manilow songs as Lone Star joked? It's a public institution supported by tax dollars. Legally available information whether it be smut or the web site to a local human resources office should not, and according to the article in the OP cannot, be limited. I guess we hang around in different circles. The vast majority of people I know would never think it's a good thing to allow someone to check out porn at a public library. In fact, I submit that most people would agree with this and 99% of them would have no fear that our entire society would crumble and we would become a military dictatorship. It's not censorship, it's common decency. Your Starbucks comparison is apples and oranges. Starbucks, as a business, is free to limit access in any way they see fit. Investors and corporate executives are free to limit anything they want. Starbucks stores are not a public space. They are private store fronts that allow relatively public access. If the property owner decides to throw you out you have no recourse no matter if your activities are legal or not. The public library, on the other hand, is public property and is available to the entire public. Agreed about the Starbucks comparison-it was stupid. Blame it on fatigue- long shift yesterday. I will reiterate that if my kids are in a public library, and they tell me there's some pervert surfing porn while they are there, I WILL be paying visit to that library and explain to him my "right" to make it difficult for him to continue surfing the web. Short of putting kids in a bubble and locking them in the basement parents are not going to protect them from everything. There are many, plenty, of learning opportunities out there. What kids may or may not see in a public library is only a small example. There is a huge difference between being overprotective of your kids and having a problem with porn in a public library. I am amazed you cannot see the difference here. Don't hide behind that liberal dodge of rights and freedoms. I really think it's OK to say that something is wrong and inappropriate. I'm by no means puritanical, but I am old fashioned- especially when it comes to my kids. I think we need to get back to a time when there were societal standards and norms. Your rights do not include a right to be free from offense. It's not about being offended, it's about exposing children to things that are inappropriate. Porn doesn't offend me. Just because kids are exposed to plenty of things we may not agree with, it does not mean we should throw up our arms in resignation, hiding behind the guise of rights and freedoms. That's one of the challenges of an open society. What offends one person will not offend another. Just because someone is offended does not, and should not, limit one's access to otherwise legal material. We've always had an open society. We also had a set of fairly universal standards of what's appropriate and acceptable, but these things also tend to be cyclic. At one point we were a puritanical and prudish society, and now the pendulum has swung wildly in the opposite direction. There should be a happy medium.
paramedicmike Posted April 28, 2011 Posted April 28, 2011 I guess we hang around in different circles. The vast majority of people I know would never think it's a good thing to allow someone to check out porn at a public library. In fact, I submit that most people would agree with this and 99% of them would have no fear that our entire society would crumble and we would become a military dictatorship. It's not censorship, it's common decency. Common decency has little to do with the argument at hand. The argument is whether adults should have and be allowed access to legal material in a public library. How would limiting adults access to legal material in a venue that their tax dollars paid for not amount to censorship? I will reiterate that if my kids are in a public library, and they tell me there's some pervert surfing porn while they are there, I WILL be paying visit to that library and explain to him my "right" to make it difficult for him to continue surfing the web. And he can exercise his right to ask that you be either removed from the facility for harassing him or, depending on local laws, take appropriate self defense measures. Either way, you'd lose. There is a huge difference between being overprotective of your kids and having a problem with porn in a public library. I am amazed you cannot see the difference here. How so? If you're not worried about being over protective of your kids then why worry about porn in the public library? How would it be handled any differently from sex/violence in other media outlets? Don't hide behind that liberal dodge of rights and freedoms. Ah yes. The "blame it on the liberals" took much longer to come out than I thought it would. Unfortunately, rights and freedoms are not a liberal dodge. It's interesting how rights and freedoms become the crutch of which ever side wants to limit those very same rights and freedoms. Really, Herbie. I thought you were able to better form an argument than to have to fall back on such exceptionally mindless political rhetoric. You disappoint me. As a side note, limited governmental control over the day to day lives of individuals, which can include the discussion over access to porn in a public library, is a more conservative political approach. Just sayin'. I really think it's OK to say that something is wrong and inappropriate. I'm by no means puritanical, but I am old fashioned- especially when it comes to my kids. I think we need to get back to a time when there were societal standards and norms. Really? Like when? The 1950's when women were oppressed and white men ruled the country? The 1850's when there were slaves and half the population couldn't vote? Who says there aren't societal standards and norms now? Just because today's standards and norms are considered different from when we were kids doesn't mean they don't exist. Nor does it mean that they're wrong or inconsistent with life today. It's not about being offended, it's about exposing children to things that are inappropriate. Porn doesn't offend me. Just because kids are exposed to plenty of things we may not agree with, it does not mean we should throw up our arms in resignation, hiding behind the guise of rights and freedoms. Who's throwing their hands up? If people don't want to expose their kids to porn then limit their time in the library. Or go with the kids to the library and responsibly supervise what the kids are doing. There is no hiding behind rights and freedoms. It is re-establishing that these rights exist. It is using these rights in order to protect their existence. It is establishing equal access to those rights and freedoms that keeps us who we are. We've always had an open society. We also had a set of fairly universal standards of what's appropriate and acceptable, but these things also tend to be cyclic. At one point we were a puritanical and prudish society, and now the pendulum has swung wildly in the opposite direction. There should be a happy medium. Who sets the standards for that happy medium? You? Me? The guys surfing porn at the public library? The religious zealots who want to rewrite history to reflect their own warped view of events? The pot smoking hippies in the VW van? We were, indeed, a puritanical and prudish society at one time. Fortunately, we were able to recognize certain inalienable rights and establish a nation that strives to protect those rights for everyone within its borders. This even includes those who can, if they so choose, view legal material in a public library that some may find offensive.
DwayneEMTP Posted April 28, 2011 Posted April 28, 2011 ...NO PORN IN A PUBLIC LIBRARY. ... Maybe I missed it..could you define "Porn" for me? Dwayne
NYCEMS9115 Posted April 28, 2011 Author Posted April 28, 2011 I have a right to bring a gun into a public library and watch porn. Cool. America is the best.
DwayneEMTP Posted April 28, 2011 Posted April 28, 2011 I have a right to bring a gun into a public library and watch porn. Cool. America is the best. What would your point be exactly? All the best..... Dwayne
Lone Star Posted April 28, 2011 Posted April 28, 2011 If you're referring to pictures and other images of the naked female form as 'porn', then you're on a mission to close or censor 7/11, the local art museum, and any other place that this 'porn' is viewed, sold or otherwise purveyed. Now that you've eliminated the kid’s access to the 'evil porn', (outside of subscriptions and 'adult bookstores'), what's next? Are we going to have public book burnings? Has "Catcher in the Rye" been put back on the 'torch list'? Once you start down this road, you're not only violating the first amendment rights of companies like Playboy, Penthouse and others; you're also now interfering with interstate commerce (which I believe is a federal offense). I guess we hang around in different circles. The vast majority of people I know would never think it's a good thing to allow someone to check out porn at a public library. In fact, I submit that most people would agree with this and 99% of them would have no fear that our entire society would crumble and we would become a military dictatorship. It's not censorship, it's common decency. Look at some of the ‘offensive stuff’ that has been deemed ‘art’ and funded by federal money from the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA)… Should we start banning works by Édouard Manet, or Picasso simply because of the fact that the nudity involved in their paintings? What about the other ‘classics’? Maybe we should start banning access to images like this, based simply on the medium used? Where do you draw the lines on what is ‘allowable’ and what isn’t? Furthermore, how is it NOT ‘censorship’ when you’re stifling the ‘creative processes of one or more simply because your personal morals are ‘offended’? Isn’t that what censorship is? How arrogant is it to presume that YOUR morals and beliefs are the ONLY ones that are ‘just and right’ while everyone else’s is ‘warped and wrong’? Agreed about the Starbucks comparison-it was stupid. Blame it on fatigue- long shift yesterday. I will reiterate that if my kids are in a public library, and they tell me there's some pervert surfing porn while they are there, I WILL be paying visit to that library and explain to him my "right" to make it difficult for him to continue surfing the web. You don’t have the ‘right’ to interfere, and your actions COULD find you not only in criminal court (for assaulting the library patron), but you COULD find yourself facing federal charges as well! Look at the federal charges that have been levied against hackers for violation of (I believe) FCC and ICC laws….
NYCEMS9115 Posted April 28, 2011 Author Posted April 28, 2011 What would your point be exactly? All the best..... Dwayne We're talking about Constitutional Rights, right? Apparently, we can do what we want; regardless. The parchment paper with the Old Engrish and fancy writing said so. I'm having EMS Week at the local Library: Porn and Guns. Plz RSVP....
Lone Star Posted April 28, 2011 Posted April 28, 2011 We're talking about Constitutional Rights, right? Apparently, we can do what we want; regardless. The parchment paper with the Old Engrish and fancy writing said so. I'm having EMS Week at the local Library: Porn and Guns. Plz RSVP.... With my concealed pistol license, I just might have a gun in the library...and yes, it IS legal!
Recommended Posts