Is porn in public libraries a First Amendment right?

[JesmanVA]

Very interesting debate. I can kind of see both sides really.

eeekonomy.com/discussion/Should-Adult-Content-at-the-Library-be-Shelved-/62

[Outinleftfield]

There is no right answer. The first amendment is just a few words in the US Constitution, which is just a piece of paper written up by the United States governments first politicians that the government today officially regards as being higher than any laws it passes. These words can be interpreted in many different ways. Whether its a first amendment right is a personal opinion, and whether the law will treat it as a right depends on the personal opinions of the Supreme Court Justices. People generally interpret the Constitution like they do anything else according to their own personal biases and prejudices. For example it would be rare to find someone who supports gun control who doesn't side with the interpretation of the 2nd amendment that it is only protecting state-run militias and not individual firearm possession and who instead says that an amendment is required. People will interpret the Constitution in what ever way is politically expedient to them if they think they have a good enough argument to be taken seriously.

EDIT: Personally, I find nothing wrong with erotic materials. They're trying to ban them based on bourgeois attitudes towards sex. A ban could also be interpreted very broadly and include things that aren't even obviously erotica or porn. I hope the right to have this in libraries is upheld.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Personally I would rather not have my little brother have to walk past people watching fat people anally penetrate canines or whatever whenever I take him to the library.

[Dimentio]

No, I do not consider graphic or written material made for sexual gratification to be a part of the supply on public libraries, which have a purpose to increase knowledge and to make culture available to the people. Public libraries are not supposed to be for the sexual gratification of the people.

But I could think that if someone wants to start a cooperative library with pornographic material, that should be allowed.

[Dr Mindbender]

Being an opponent of censorship in all forms bar the no platform stance, perhaps if libraries were to sanction off adults only areas it would become practical, but i think people have have the right to be able to bring their children to public internet points without worrying about them being exposed to others viewing tastes.

But as dimentio said i dont think satisfying peoples sexual tastes is the onus of libraries or a publicly funded body, it's perhaps a niche service that could be provided by a non government specialist. That said, being a potential future user of a computer i'd be just as worried about the mess that they'd leave on the keyboard as the mess that they'd leave in the hard drive and history folder.

[FreeFocus]

I think this is a ridiculous position. Public libraries exist to increase knowledge and provide resources to people. Porn doesn't increase knowledge in any meaningful way, and if one wanted to argue they were "learning about human anatomy and sexuality," there's already stuff in the science section for that.

[amandevsingh]

America is becoming more and more of a Liberalised Circle Jerk, while remaining die hard conservative...

[RotStern]

Rofl I agree with Comrade Joe xD :laugh:

[blake 3:17]

So what happens if you want to look at criticisms of porn that include pornographic images? How about researching the paintings of Rubens or the photographs of Robert Mapplethorpe or Nan Goldin? Richard Kern? He's both a pornographer and an artist. Where's the line?

There's a lot online I find distasteful. I attended a college a few years ago that had fairly high "parental" screening on its web access. One site I regularly visited wasn't allowed on the system because of swearing! And this was at a school that only adults attend. So far we've been lucky here because school and public librarians have been quick and commited to defending free ideas.

Anyways a Conservative MPP seems to agree --
Porn filters needed in schools, libraries: MPP


Last Updated: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 | 4:34 PM ET Comments49 (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/09/16/ontario-mpp-porn-filter232.html#socialcomments)Recommend9 (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/09/16/ontario-mpp-porn-filter232.html#)

CBC News (http://www.revleft.com/news/credit.html)


A Conservative MPP has tabled a private member's bill that would force libraries and schools in Ontario to install software that will block pornography sites.
The bill was proposed by Gerry Martiniuk, who represents the riding of Cambridge. It received routine first reading at Queen's Park Wednesday afternoon.
Martiniuk said the idea came from Rob Nickel, a former OPP officer and expert on online pornography, who witnessed a man downloading pornography at a Cambridge library with children sitting nearby.
The rules are needed because libraries have a patchwork of policies on the issue, and some computers in some schools lack filters, Martiniuk said.
"We all know that there's a shortage of manpower both in our public libraries and in our schools," he told CBC News.
"You can't supervise the kids 24 hours a day. This would alleviate that problem."
The former police officer acknowledged there is some concern that his bill is seen by some as a form of censorship.
But he disagrees, and believes prohibiting access to porn sites on school and library computers will protect children.


http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/09/16/ontario-mpp-porn-filter232.html

[Il Medico]

Yeah, no. There is a time and place to watch porn and do whatever you do. And at the library is not the place.

[Jazzratt]

For those of us (like me) not necessarily that clued into american culture or politics this is the text of the 1st ammendment:


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Does banning porn in public libraries violate this? Uh, well unless public library policy is congressionally ratified and/or pornography counts under either the definition of "speech" or "the press" (which is one fuck of a minefield) then no, no it doesn't. However I don't think the question is that useful either to those upholding the spirit of the US constitution or to revolutionary leftists. The former because a lot of anti-obscenity laws and such have been passed without quibble and have been justified using the language of the constitution. And the latter for the reason that the 1st amendment is nothing to do with us.

I believe that it should be possible to get porn from libraries. Not, I hasten to add, allow people to watch or view it on the premesis (not even in wank booths); rather perhaps include an age-restricted section which supplies opaque bags for pieces taken out. I think it's quite a weak value judgment to say that the purview of libraries allows for various works of fiction (and even erotica, in some cases) in the name of "culture" but that pornography is not part of this culture (even if arguably its contribution to our culture is primarily misogynist dross).

[SurrogateofTime]

No, there shouldn't be pornography shelved at public libraries... There is no beneficial value that increases knowledge in pornography.

[Dimentio]

Being an opponent of censorship in all forms bar the no platform stance, perhaps if libraries were to sanction off adults only areas it would become practical, but i think people have have the right to be able to bring their children to public internet points without worrying about them being exposed to others viewing tastes.

But as dimentio said i dont think satisfying peoples sexual tastes is the onus of libraries or a publicly funded body, it's perhaps a niche service that could be provided by a non government specialist. That said, being a potential future user of a computer i'd be just as worried about the mess that they'd leave on the keyboard as the mess that they'd leave in the hard drive and history folder.

In a non-capitalist society based on free access to information, everything is "publicly" funded. All we have is two alternatives, information which is directly offered by the community, and information which is available in cooperative units which are sponsored by the community but technically autonomous from it.

[Jazzratt]

No, there shouldn't be pornography shelved at public libraries... There is no beneficial value that increases knowledge in pornography.

What is the "beneficial value that increases knowledge" to be founbd in most of the dross in the fiction section?

[Guerrilla22]

If you want to look at porn you are free to do so in the privacy of your own home, where it should be. Public libraries have had numerous problems with people not only viewing pornography, but actually masturbating right in the library, seriously. I have no problem at all with libraries using internet filters, the right to view porn via tax payer provided resources doesn't seem like a right to me.

[Trystan]

Libraries are there for educational reasons. And, actually, my public library is already forgetting that - stocking the place full of DVDs and CDs and even putting a fucking play area for children right in the middle of the place as their parents complete fucking facebook quizzes. And there's no quiet area to go and study. And they don't even tell people to shut the fuck up if they're talking loudly. So no, I don't want to see a bunch of blokes fapping off when I go there either. It's not a freedom of speech issue or anything like that, it's just that libraries should be libraries rather than wank centres or HMV.

Rant over.

[Jazzratt]

If you want to look at porn you are free to do so in the privacy of your own home, where it should be. Public libraries have had numerous problems with people not only viewing pornography, but actually masturbating right in the library, seriously. I have no problem at all with libraries using internet filters, the right to view porn via tax payer provided resources doesn't seem like a right to me.

The problem is not access to pornography, but public wanking (a criminal offence anyway). Unfiltered internet access should be available, although obviously not in a place where others will be able to peer over your shoulder at your screen (which is fucking rude behaviour anyway).

Unless you propose to remove anything that is not strictly educational from public libraries then your opposition to the availability of porn is moralistic prudery. At best.

[Wanted Man]

Sounds like a pointless debate. Is porn on Saturday morning TV a free speech right? Is porn in university a free speech right? What about porn in pubs, bookstores, trains? Of course not. But maybe it's interesting to people with a libertarian hobby.

[makesi]

So what happens if you want to look at criticisms of porn that include pornographic images? How about researching the paintings of Rubens or the photographs of Robert Mapplethorpe or Nan Goldin? Richard Kern? He's both a pornographer and an artist. Where's the line?

There's a lot online I find distasteful. I attended a college a few years ago that had fairly high "parental" screening on its web access. One site I regularly visited wasn't allowed on the system because of swearing! And this was at a school that only adults attend. So far we've been lucky here because school and public librarians have been quick and commited to defending free ideas.

Anyways a Conservative MPP seems to agree --


http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2009/09/16/ontario-mpp-porn-filter232.html


I know my answer, at least. Richard Kern is a pornographer not an artist. And his webpage was another example for me as to why most photography is not art. Look at another photographer--Richard Ballen. That guy's stuff is utter crap.
I may be going to an art show tomorrow because a friend of mine offered me $20 or so to write a paper that he needs for class. There is usually a lot of photography/porn/mundane crap at these events.

You know, sometimes, when I think about all these things like porn in libraries and debates about what shows and movies are reactionary and whether they should be banned or not and if the public schools are horrible institutions of bourgeoise power that need to be abolished I get to thinking about Marx's comments on free trade. Anybody remember them and see where I'm already going with this?

Marx said that he was in favor of free trade, that he supported it. But as a revolutionary and only in a revolutionary sense. He said, insomuch as free trade brings out the already inherent tendencies of capitalism in a more direct and unhindered manner, it exacerbates the contradictions that those tendencies are part and parcel of in the overall nature of capitalism as a system. Thus, Marx said, go for it with the free trade--it will only serve to undermine capitalism all the more rapidly in the long run.

I am sometimes inclined to think that letting capitalism run amok with its cultural productions in the United States and the social tendencies such as hypothetical porn libraries and irresponsible libertarianism, which I see as connected to the overall alienated and unhealthy lifestyle promoted by capitalism, would serve to exacerbate the problems inside the American empire and perhaps quicken its loss of hegemony.