Found this interesting...
SB 450 - This act requires public libraries, by January 1, 2010, to adopt written policies, consistent with contemporary community standards, on the placement of books and other materials to restrict minors from gaining access to material that is obscene or pornographic for minors. Exempted books and materials include those in collections that require the written permission of a parent or guardian of an unemancipated minor. Policies must also contain procedures for members of the public to challenge the placement of such books and other materials and provide comments and guidance on the library policies. As an alternative, any library that does not adopt written policies must prominently display a statement that the library may contain uncensored materials that may be objectionable and offensive to minors. Libraries must include in their annual report the number of complaints about placement of books and their resolution. Library policies must be recorded with the city or county and made available to the public at the library and city or county government office. A violation of this section is subject to a misdemeanor.
4 comments:
You people love to cling to your Bible and push your goody-good "morals" on the rest of us who really could care less.
We are warning you, if any book that you find to be "unfit" or "immoral" gets moved, banned or otherwise placed out of the public's view, my friends and I will launch a media campaign that you can only dream of. You ban books that you don't like, so we will ban books that we don't like (i.e., anything remotely religious is on our list).
Your "concerned citizen" disguise is a feeble attempt to cover up your real intentions. Religion has absolutely no place in public life whatsoever and once that line that separates church and state has been crossed, there is only revolution. Our revolution will be an onslaught of news articles, media attention, rallies and other forms of public display.
The parents must be in charge of what their children read and not some "special interest group" such as yourselves. As with violent TV shows, movies and other mature material, the parent must step in and take charge. That means the issue belongs at home and not to the city or government to decide what is fit and what is not.
Have you people ever read up on the book burnings conducted by Nazi Germany prior to World War II? Well, if you paid any attention to your history, the Nazis burned and censored any book they deemed to be unfit for their society and eliminated all possible texts and tomes that might of brought about the people questioning their government. What you people are doing isn't much different, just minus the swastika armbands and the fires (although, personally, I wouldn't be surprised if organized religion ever chose to do that). Remember, the last time church was mixed in with politics, people were burned at the stake.
Just remember, you people continue this crusade against freedom of speech and we will take action using the media as our weapon and the people as our allies. Enjoy your ignorance and have a nice day.
Yours,
The Supporters of Freedom of Speech
Dear lard,
Interesting take that you have. Parents in charge of their kids viewing/reading is good. We seem to agree on that. Unfortunately you advocate a society where a parent cannot fully supervise because what one may deem objectionable is everywhere and therefore impossible to weed out. Like spiking the punch bowl with gin & telling others to strain it out if I don't want it in my glass. ( nothing against a good gin & tonic.)
Unfortunately, societies only function when there are generally accepted moral principals. It is a main function of a society. (read Leviathan).
Your rant against religion shows you to be a bigot. I won’t attack your agnosticism/atheism …whatever. I won’t agree but I won’t attack it. What I do object to is your insistence that our society release any claim to propriety or moral standard and then you turn around and claim that any objection to such is radical.
You attack my basis for morality (religion) because you don’t like morality, but I don’t attack yours or ask for books on atheism banned. You have an agenda, and you are a bigot.
So let me ask you LEE, are you threatening me?
Sounds like you're being threatened. Why throw in the comment about being burned at the stake?
Mr. Lord, so if you dislike Bible pushing and goody-good moral pushing people... does that make YOU immoral? And I love the creative name calling: "you people".
Hmmmm.... let's see....
im⋅mor⋅al –adjective 1. violating moral principles; not conforming to the patterns of conduct usually accepted or established as consistent with principles of personal and social ethics.
2. licentious or lascivious.
Synonyms: bad, wicked, dissolute, dissipated, profligate. Immoral, abandoned, depraved describe one who makes no attempt to curb self-indulgence.
Yeah, I'm guessing by your rant, your self-description is pretty close. I'm with Steve-O, you sound like a bigot. Or are there double standards for you? Your comments on this blog are completely full of hate. No line has been crossed, and religion wasn't brought into this by the advocates. How is a request to MOVE sexually explicit books to the adult section where they belong, religous in nature?
I come here every so often to check on the progress (or lack of thanks to the city of West Bend) of this issue, and it sure would be nice to read comments that actually pertained to the issue at hand, instead of some misinterpreted rants.
Post a Comment