ACLU suing library for blocking porn access

Yep, you read that correctly. The ACLU is suing a library for not offering access to online porn. I guess they feel it's a civil right to be able to pleasure yourself in a public library, in front of children.

Some people often wonder if liberals are really insane. Issues like this certainly help strenghten that arguement.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/03/10309475-aclu-sues-library-for-not-offering-online-porn

 

The filter is designed poorly and for that reason I actually support the ACLU on this. The filter as it is now would prevent you from viewing art galleries that have hoards of non-pornographic content, you also couldn't do any research on the topic because all the sites would be blocked.

 

Why don't we have an area in the Library for adults only, close the view from the rest of the building and allow them to browse naked all thru that area? The public good is what a Library is for, not to feed some twisted thought you can go and watch porn. Why don't we sue them and make the Library buy Playboy or Hustler too, while we are at it lets make them buy gay porn mags to just to be fair.

 

Not sure why you quoted me, I clearly don't think looking at porn in a public library is acceptable behavior, but if the filter stifles legitimate browsing and/or research then that's problematic.

I'm fine with filters, they just need to block the bad stuff and let the good through, in this case it blocks both.

 

Playboy and Penthouse have articles on non-pornographic things don't they? Why doesn't the library carry those publications?

 

Legitmate browsing? Certainly there are art galleries that aren't blocked. And the college kid surely has access to the college computers.

 

Filter needs to be set up correctly, simple as that...

 

I can see both sides of the argument, but I think the ACLU is going to lose this case.

The concept of some filtering seems reasonable and the "broadness" of it can be corrected by simply using a different filtering technology/application or implementing some white listing. The ACLU picks some strange fights.

 

It's not the ACLU, and "liberals", we should be going after.

It's the three idiot stick library patrons who asked the ACLU to represent them. The ACLU doesn't just defend the liberties of liberals.

 

Maybe the answer is to make one computer accessible to nude pictures and statues, no porn and only available to adults. I am sick of the ACLU. They have pushed freedom of speech well beyond what our forefathers ever dreamed of.

 

Stupid analogy. A better one would be banning national geographic because it shows boobs.

The filter is blocking Google images, it's preventing legitimate browsing and research, what part of that aren't you understanding?

 

That's why they need to set up the filter correctly...

There's technology that can selectively block certain images, even on Google...

 

I have no issue with the library filtering what it deems appropriate/inappropriate.

Working in the IT field myself for the last couple decades..no filter is perfect. Just one of those things people who go to the Library have to live with. If they dont like it...well take 300 bucks and buy your own cheap laptop at walmart, and get your own internet.

Beggars can't be choosers as the old sying goes.

 

Are you really surprised since their own people are pedos?

http://thecitytroll.blogspot.com/2007/03/aclu-pedophile-predator-caught.html

 

Pedos & NAMBLA are more accepted & protected ??

 

Yup, that's really the root of the matter and it's not really terribly hard. No filter is perfect but it'd be better to get to all legitimate material and some smut get through than to block anything that might even remotely be considered smut and a lot of legitimate material as well.

 

Our forefathers supported an absolute freedom of speech; it has taken centuries of laws to restrict that absolute freedom to a qualified freedom. In other words, you are confusing the modern development of restrictive laws for approval from the founding fathers... one aspect of a common conservative mistake.

 

Hell, we got filters at work that do it...

Surely, that's not the only place they exist...

 

Please demonstrate how the founding fathers supported an absolute approach to free speech.

 

Uh, MAYBE, just MAYBE, because they put "Freedom of Speech" in the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution with NO qualifications??

That kind of a major clue, Sherlock!

 

There is a time and a place for looking at porn, and a library is not one of those places. Look at it in the privacy of your own home. Not a library, what if a young child walks behind you and sees it?

 

Some libraries do, actually.

 

I did not know Bill Clinton, Barney Frank, or Anthony Wiener were having problems getting their porn

 

The ACLU deserves a junk-punch for this one.

 

The same "no qualifications" claim is applicable to free exercise of religion but many you supported a recent court decision to remove a displayed prayer in a public school. The fact that both schools and libraries are govt owned and controlled is a key to the source of the conflict over what is permitted and what is prohibited. I conclude, after thinking the issue through, that the actual solution is to separate school and state and library and state.