« Sen. Talent I Beg to Differ | Main | Self Censoring TV; an idea that makes me sick. »

Saturday, March 12, 2005

Jerking Off at the Public Library

My wife and I were having a political discussion last weekend about constitutional rights and the subject, introduced by her, came up about the right to view porn sites in a public library.

I must admit that she is a lot farther to the left then I would like but she is my wife so I accommodate her thought pattern. She was arguing that it should be O.K. for people to look up sites on the web, at a public library, where as the sites content has to do primarily with sex.

My rebuttal to her argument was that the library is no place for people to be looking up porn sites for personal pleasure. A public library is no place to let someone fulfill or indulge in their personal fantasies. This kind of activity can be performed in the privacy of someones home without insult or injury to the person passing by. So why should it be allowed in the public library?

She addressed this remark by stating that "what if you were a college student doing a research paper, wouldn't you want access to all materials possible to conduct your research?"

I have to admit I was perplexed by her response, I thought, well she might have a point here, isn't the public library, before the age of the Internet, the place where citizens went to conduct research? So, how could municipalities put restrictions on what can and can't be looked at on a computer at the public library? Isn't the public library exactly that, "a public library"?

So I gathered my thoughts real quick and I argued that libraries have never had pornographic magazines on the shelves next to other publications that are readily available, so why should access to a porn site on a computer, at a public library, be any different?

Her response was, "its not any different, we've just been censored for a long time before the age of the Internet."

At this point I knew the discussion was going nowhere fast so I asked her "how important is this issue that you need to make a stand, plant a flag, in the middle of a public library?"

And her response was, "it's no different then people saying I have to look at the ten commandments every time I enter a public court house, it's a religious marking, it offends me, no different then porn in a public library."

I realized at this point that my wife was not arguing her beliefs but that she was arguing her rights as an American citizen not to be afflicted by the thoughts of others within a government building that she frequents often.

So I started thinking of a compromise, what if we put private viewing booths in the libraries for computers that have Internet access, were as anyone can do whatever they want, shielded from public view, and we will do the same in the court houses. We will allow viewing of the ten commandments but only if it's in a private viewing area where, just like porn in the library, the true believers can jerk off all they want without offending anybody.

Posted by The Bastard at 02:00 PM in Politics, Religion | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834584be369e200d8343d437753ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Jerking Off at the Public Library:

Comments

I'm not sure how firmly your tongue was imbedded in your cheek when you suggested a private viewing area for the 10 Commandments but that thought filled my mind with hilarious images.

Certainly "Mrs. Bastard" understands that the problem is not the written word but the visuals that present a problem in a public library or other public setting.

I'm not particularly puritanical about sex but I don't feel that the images you might find on a Porn Site belong in a public setting. As unfair as it might sound, that poor college kid researching his thesis on "Sex Toys vs. Vegetables for the Perfect Orgasm" should have to do his "research" in private.

Posted by: Whymrhymer | Mar 13, 2005 9:20:38 AM

Actually, George Carlin making certain jestures on stage is what keeps popping into my head. Yea, I admit, a little tongue and cheak action going on.

I originally wanted to write about how far apart the left from the right was. I mean one group, Mrs. Bastard and her lefties, are arguing for porn in public libraries (great place to make a stand, not like there are more pressing issues at hand) while the other group, the neocons, are arguing for the right to view material of a different nature in a different public building.

Its ridiculous, we can tie up the courts in far better ways than these petty arguements. And they are petty, these are public buildings folks not places to make your stand. Leave the walls blank and yea, keep porn out of the public libraries. If you need it that bad go stand in an aisle at 7-Eleven and cover the Hustler your holding with Good Housekeeping. Thats what we did before the advent of the internet.

Mrs. Bastard did have one good point I did not mention in the original post. What about all the sex and degregation already sitting on the shelves in time honored classics? Should these also be banned?

Yep, the waters not clear and there is always ways to muddy it. Maybe its just using COMMON SENSE that makes the most sense.

Posted by: The Bastard | Mar 13, 2005 10:09:18 AM

First and last it is basically a stupid debate. Want to research your porn? Open your own god damn library. Matter a fact you can name it the Porn Library Organization (P.L.O. who you probably support). Leave the god damn kids out of it. The Ten Commandments were part of the forming of our country and it's rights not porn. Want the right to porn in libraries please move to the country of your choice that currently has it in their libraries. (Oh, please name that country.) In closing, please don't discuss the Ten Commandments v.s. Porn while stoned with Mrs. Bastard

Posted by: TheChosenOne | Mar 13, 2005 11:22:35 AM

Well, at least you got your name right.

Posted by: The Powers That Be | Mar 13, 2005 10:26:22 PM

Getting your name right gets you what? Like, 200 points on your SAT right?

Posted by: The Bastard | Mar 13, 2005 10:57:37 PM

I agree with your wife. I'm glad you brought up her point later on the following because I am going to reiterate it:

You said "Mrs. Bastard did have one good point I did not mention in the original post. What about all the sex and degregation already sitting on the shelves in time honored classics?"

I do not believe the above should be banned! That is book and information censorship again and, to me, violates our first amendment. Also, consider this: what one person feels is "porn" another may not categorize that way. Many of those classic books including the Bible (and I'm an athiest, so this is strictly for example), contain information that others feel should be banned or controlled to the public.

Come on folks, get a grip! Do not endorse taking away our freedom to read! I do not endorse public sex, solitary or otherwise. READING is a different story. (all puns seriously intended upon "Story.")

Many people do research information that others may feel is "pornographic" or inappropriate. If someone is truly acting inappropriate at the library then the police should be called.

I had a relative work in the public library system for years. It is one place, like other quiet, secluded places, that attracts "flashers." That is NOT a reason to ban nor limit educational material. The matter "at hand", as it were, is easily and quickly taken care of by calling the plice.

Whether you want to agree with it or not, to some people many topics are educational and are not read for "jollies."

Remember the days back in history before some of us were born, when certain books were banned. Don't revert to those caveman/cavewoman days!

"Bastard", the idea of private viewing booths highlights and endorses a view that certain information is wrong, or must be protected from certain individuals. That type of thinking spreads the notion that "sexually related material" is vile, etc. Let's please not do that to your youth or folks of any age.

For a long time, in some states, parental consent was required for certain books to be checked out. This included books on homosexuality, suicide, reproduction, contraception, native tribes in anyplace, etc. I am not a lawyer, so I do not know the current laws. I do know, from being a professional in the social services fields, that preventing access to such books and thereby placing obstacles for knowledge, increases teen suicide rates and pregnancy!

Posted by: Green-Eyed Lady | Mar 14, 2005 2:07:04 AM

Heeeyyyyy!!!! This was just a tongue and cheek piece, don't worry I'm not advocating banning books. And yes Mrs. Bastard is a hard cookie to crack sometimes. But she does have a point (by the way, porn is banned at the library) but you do have to take a stand because its a slippery slope and if you don't raise a flag we would have book burning again.

Posted by: The Bastard | Mar 14, 2005 5:34:50 AM

Dude, as long as I don't have to clean the booths rock on.

Posted by: The Cranky Liberal | Mar 14, 2005 7:15:20 AM

Could you imagine all that "Jesus Juice" all over the walls at the courthouse booths. You could put a sign over the booths saying "Two Minutes and a Cigarette With God" 25 cents per minute. And have a guard outside the door to bang on the door if some holy roller is taking too long!

Posted by: The Bastard | Mar 14, 2005 7:33:48 AM

I see no problme with porn at the library....just make sure that the adult computers are away from the kidscomputers...and about indulging yoru fantasies at the library, what if your fantasy is the library lady?

Posted by: Kender | Mar 14, 2005 11:20:05 AM

I never had a hot librarian growing up so I can't equate but ........being the wacky liberals that we are painted out to be I guess I would support a back room and a librarian that MUST recipricate!

Posted by: The Bastard | Mar 14, 2005 8:03:16 PM

Ha Ha, I agree with Mrs. Bastard for reasons that she would probably despise if she is as left as you portray her. I don't want my tax dollars used for public access to porn or religion.:)

Posted by: Ashley | Mar 14, 2005 10:06:09 PM

"the Bastard", I realize that your post was a tongue and cheek piece. I do have a brain. :)
However, this is a public forum and you all ask "to bring it on" so I did! I aired what I feel are important issues rather than all the jokes you all are making. Much of the meat of my post comment(NO PUN INTENDED) is not a joke to me. I was not attacking you, just airing my opinions, which I thought was the purpose of this forum. Sheesh!

Most of you all here are folks whom I read regularly. So, if you're not "touchy" than perhaps it would behoove you to realize that someone other than one of your writers here has a valid thoughts............ Of all places, I thought this would be a *real* open forum. Hmmmm. I shall continue to come here, but only to read.

Posted by: Green-Eyed Lady | Mar 14, 2005 11:50:47 PM

Green-Eyed Lady

Wait, wait, wait wait :-)

Do comment in the future, I was not poking fun at you I think I even agreed that a stand must be taken some where because of the slippery slope that banning can lead to. Please take no offense to what I might have said and please know that none of us here would try to purposely alienate anybody.

If you've got something to say than by all mens pen it!

Posted by: The Bastard | Mar 15, 2005 1:51:59 AM

I did not think you "were poking fun at me." Plus, I'm "not offended." I'm a tough and realistic cookie.

I also do not need nor want "agreement."

My point is that you missed so many points I made. Ex. What many define as "porn" is not porn to others. In additon, you made a later fallacious statement about the library system banning "porn." True, hard core "porn" is banned, but the topic you broached touched on sexuality in research, the classics, etc.

The rest of this thread was much more focused on the absurd images of men "Spewing" forth their "opinions." I chose to say I won't comment here, because it feels pointless, merely because I did not join in the humor (that I can readily see and even laugh at) each time I posted.

The issue (all puns intended) are NOT merely tongue in cheek nor restricted to "oral" communication.

I do have to laugh at your typo (I make them all the time): "by all MENS pen it". LOL (I appreciate comments from both men and women- thx for the wee hr laugh)

BTW, I know that none of you here are purposely trying to alienate anyone. I have been a regular reader on several of your blogs and even cross linked to at couple.

I've sent much traffic this way and will contnue to do so, but yes, I will refrain from voicing my opinion, because it was met, as if I had nothing of value to say. I don't need to prove or convince anyone. I think I was disillusioned about the purpose of this blog.
Take care and keep bringing it on...

Posted by: green-eyed Lady | Mar 16, 2005 3:42:17 AM

When I first read the title, I thought, "How can anyone argue on that point?" Then I read it and was amazed.

I'm a Christian and I do not agree with it, but because I live in America, I have to respect what someone eles does. They have the right pleasure themselves.

Posted by: Tallwonder | Nov 4, 2005 6:49:49 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.