Censorship!

The Other Guy

Spam King
Story Here

My local library has been getting some flak for having a "sex book" on its shelves. Personally, I think there's no reason why the library should step in; it's a book, parents are supposed to watch what their kids take out. And what kid has the guts to check out a book like that anyway? It's not about the children, it's about the adult.

What do you think?
 
What do you mean by Sex Books? Do you mean like Karma Sutra? Or are you Pornography? Or is it regular art with naked people, because we all know how squemesh we all get when we see a woman''s breasts. Even our former Attorney General John Ashcroft got all embarrassed because a statue of the Spirit of Justice showed abit of teat.
 
Well, I was interested until she bought the mention of "god" into it. WTF has god got to do with the way we want to bring up our children.

Personally I feel that the book should be available, but not on public display.
 
Well, Spike, believe it or not, a LOT of people in the world use their religion as a tool in raising their children. God is used to differentiate between right and wrong.... "What would Jesus do?" for example.

mmarsh, from reading, it's a book similar to the Kama Sutra. As far as my opinion goes, I agree with senojekips. The book should be available, but not for just anyone. Does the library not have a restricted section?
 
Well, Spike, believe it or not, a LOT of people in the world use their religion as a tool in raising their children.
Yes Rob,... we know,... that's why the world is full of whack jobs.

Who in their right mind would base their morals on a figment of the imagination that advocates such things as the killing of children, and terrifying those poor weak souls who don't have backbone to face the fact that there is no god who will save them from anything. Most religions and christianity in particular operate in a moral vacuum.
 
The book should be available, but not for just anyone. Does the library not have a restricted section?
The library has two wings, adult books on one side, children's books on the other. There are no restrictions, but before anyone under 18 gets a card their parents have to sign off that they are responsible for what their children check out. I mean, you can't really restrict too much, if you're a high schooler doing a history report you need to have access to real history books.
 
Personally I feel that the book should be available, but not on public display.
Well said, I agree with you.

If the library should censor anything it shouldn't be sex - it should be "make you own bomb at home" books (in my opinion). Anyway, people are going to get their hands on whatever they want in one way or another. Sex is not dirty and evil and it shouldn't be "censored" to adults.
 
The library has two wings, adult books on one side, children's books on the other. There are no restrictions, but before anyone under 18 gets a card their parents have to sign off that they are responsible for what their children check out. I mean, you can't really restrict too much, if you're a high schooler doing a history report you need to have access to real history books.
Well instead of just having it be a one time thing, I'd say no one under 18 should be allowed to check out those books. Reference, certainly, but not take home.



Spike... Relax... It was all off topic to begin with.
 
I find it interesting how a sex book in the local library can call for censorship.
 
Last edited:
Well instead of just having it be a one time thing, I'd say no one under 18 should be allowed to check out those books. Reference, certainly, but not take home.
Come on people, what are you afraid of?? When I was 17 I didn't go to the library to get a book with semi-nude pictures to 'help' myself to get rid of my needs.... at least for 5 minutes. I got myself a wank-mag. These kids have internet with plenty of better pictures and yes.... They already had sex!

This is so incredibly senseless. This woman thinks that by removing this book so solves some big problem, but she isn't. She is just closing her eyes to other issues. The book isn't the problem at all. This misplaced moralism under the pretense of God and faith is for stirring up the hornets nest. Now she started some useless crusade and has the rest of hard-core believers in her corner. Perhaps she should get a real job so she has something useful to do, instead of becoming Don Quixote!
 
Frankly, what's the fuss about? In Britain children learn about sex at the age of 10! And in some European countries even younger. And I think they should know more about it to stop under-age pregnancies and so on. Frankly, children need to have a better understanding of sex so I think the library is in it's right to have it on the shelves. However, if your a parent and you don't want your child reading stuff like that then fair enough but it's your responsibility to make sure they don;t read it not the libraries.
 
Well instead of just having it be a one time thing, I'd say no one under 18 should be allowed to check out those books. Reference, certainly, but not take home.
Find a kid under the age of 18 with the guts to check out that book, and you'll be looking at one confident kid.
Frankly, what's the fuss about? In Britain children learn about sex at the age of 10! And in some European countries even younger. And I think they should know more about it to stop under-age pregnancies and so on. Frankly, children need to have a better understanding of sex so I think the library is in it's right to have it on the shelves. However, if your a parent and you don't want your child reading stuff like that then fair enough but it's your responsibility to make sure they don;t read it not the libraries.
In the US we have this disturbing notion that if we pretend sex doesn't exist kids won't find out about it. Of course, this is insane, but it seems to be the way we run things here anymore. All this does is give us kids that act even more immature and are more likely to make mistakes.
 
Last edited:
You want to keep dragging the subject up, I'm just here to keep you honest.

Relax,.... and the thread is over run with drivel.
Sorry... WHO drug up the subject of God? Did I say something about it? NO. That was YOU my friend. And that entire POST was off topic...


Gentlemen, I realize that children today have PLENTY of access to all the pornographic materials they want/need, but that doesn't change the fact that a public institution shouldn't be providing it to them willingly. I'm all for education, but no kid needs a sex position book, even if they're already having sex (which a surprising amount are NOT).


Children should learn about the general concepts of sex, not the finer points of different positions. They should be taught to be SAFE with sex, not what positions feel the best.
 
Sorry... WHO drug up the subject of God?
Marti Shrigley, bought it up and you said in answer to my post about her beliefs,....
Well, Spike, believe it or not, a LOT of people in the world use their religion as a tool in raising their children.
Did I say something about it?
YES, Rob, I believe you did,.. ^^^^^^ See second quote, above.

And,... No,... my initial post was not off topic as it clearly related to the beliefs of the complainant in this thread..

P.S. The past tense of drag is dragged, To drug, is to put one under the influence of a medication.;)
 
Gentlemen, I realize that children today have PLENTY of access to all the pornographic materials they want/need, but that doesn't change the fact that a public institution shouldn't be providing it to them willingly. I'm all for education, but no kid needs a sex position book, even if they're already having sex (which a surprising amount are NOT).


Children should learn about the general concepts of sex, not the finer points of different positions. They should be taught to be SAFE with sex, not what positions feel the best.
I think you're missing the point, that being that the book is on the opposite side of the library from the children's section, which fills the western wing. The board conceded to place the book on the shelf where it belongs; a middle-to-high shelf on the east end of the library. It's not a children's book, it's not in the children's section. But that wasn't enough for this woman. And who said the public institution is providing it willingly? Doesn't Victoria's Secret have larger than life pictures of supermodels in lingerie in the windows of their stores in public malls? If you're going to say that the library is willingly providing children with sexual books, what do you have to say about the eye candy at the shopping mall?

Secondly, as I said before, find me a minor who has the guts and self esteem to check out a book like that!

Granted, no kid needs a sex position book, but what kid is in the position (no pun intended) where he even needs to seek one? That's just creating unnecessary rules.
 
Marti Shrigley, bought it up and you said in answer to my post about her beliefs,....
But it was not relevant to the topic that The Other Guy wanted this thread to be about. I see God NO WHERE in his post, therefore, it should not have been brought up. He started the thread, therefore HE designates in which direction the thread should go.
YES, Rob, I believe you did,.. ^^^^^^ See second quote, above.
I meant without provocation. I was merely responding to your off topic rant about religion somehow being relevant to the topic.
And,... No,... my initial post was not off topic as it clearly related to the beliefs of the complainant in this thread..
Yes, but not to the topic itself.
P.S. The past tense of drag is dragged, To drug, is to put one under the influence of a medication.;)
Thank you for the correction.




I think you're missing the point, that being that the book is on the opposite side of the library from the children's section, which fills the western wing. The board conceded to place the book on the shelf where it belongs; a middle-to-high shelf on the east end of the library. It's not a children's book, it's not in the children's section. But that wasn't enough for this woman.
Of course, I understand all that. And I don't agree with the woman... The book shouldn't be gotten rid of altogether. I suppose there's not much more anyone could do, bar banning the book from the library outright.
And who said the public institution is providing it willingly? Doesn't Victoria's Secret have larger than life pictures of supermodels in lingerie in the windows of their stores in public malls? If you're going to say that the library is willingly providing children with sexual books, what do you have to say about the eye candy at the shopping mall?
If it's on the shelves, they're providing it willingly. As far as lingerie... There's a large difference between lingerie and a sex manual... No one ever got pregnant wearing panties.

Granted, no kid needs a sex position book, but what kid is in the position (no pun intended) where he even needs to seek one? That's just creating unnecessary rules.
Kids who are having underaged sex... There's no invisible chastity belt that disappears when a child turns 18..... They're able to have sex before then. Many, I dare say MOST, do have sex before then.
 
1)But it was not relevant to the topic that The Other Guy wanted this thread to be about. I see God NO WHERE in his post, therefore, it should not have been brought up. He started the thread, therefore HE designates in which direction the thread should go.
I meant without provocation. I was merely responding to your off topic rant about religion somehow being relevant to the topic.

Of course, I understand all that. And I don't agree with the woman... The book shouldn't be gotten rid of altogether. I suppose there's not much more anyone could do, bar banning the book from the library outright.

2)If it's on the shelves, they're providing it willingly. As far as lingerie... There's a large difference between lingerie and a sex manual... No one ever got pregnant wearing panties.

3)Kids who are having underaged sex... There's no invisible chastity belt that disappears when a child turns 18..... They're able to have sex before then. Many, I dare say MOST, do have sex before then.
1-Actually, it's in the link I posted, seems relevant to me.

2-But you yet again avoid the point I made of what minor will check this book out?

3-Trust me, I'm well aware of this. But there's no blindfold that disappears once they turn eighteen, and it is no one's job except the parents to censor their kids. And what's the likelihood they even pick up this book if they don't know anything about sex? I have a little brother in third grade. On the rare chance that he'd happen to actually select this book, which he wouldn't because he either can't reach that shelf or the book would not interest him, there is no way he would make it to the checkout without my parents stopping him, because that's their job as parents, to watch what he reads. Not the job of the library, the job of the PARENT.

As for kids having sex before the age of 18? I didn't grow up in a cardboard box, you know. It happens, I'm quite aware. But is restriction necessary? If the kid has been brought up correctly such measures are unnecessary, because if super-kid does work up the nerve to check out the book going to play it safe. Once again, it comes back to the parents.
 
Last edited:
1-Actually, it's in the link I posted, seems relevant to me.
My apologies then... I figured you addressed what you wanted to be discussed in your post... I'd like to address Central Ohio Technical College, but I felt that would be off topic.
2-But you yet again avoid the point I made of what minor will check this book out?
I direct you to "kids who are having underage sex"... If a 15 year old who has had sex finds this book, he might just want to try some of it out. You don't have to be in the 3rd grade to be considered a kid.....
3-Trust me, I'm well aware of this. But there's no blindfold that disappears once they turn eighteen, and it is no one's job except the parents to censor their kids. And what's the likelihood they even pick up this book if they don't know anything about sex? I have a little brother in third grade. On the rare chance that he'd happen to actually select this book, which he wouldn't because he either can't reach that shelf or the book would not interest him, there is no way he would make it to the checkout without my parents stopping him, because that's their job as parents, to watch what he reads. Not the job of the library, the job of the PARENT.
Again... 4th grade still equals child. I'm not worried about 9 year olds... I'm worried about 13,14,15 year olds who are just daring and stupid enough to try it... PROBABLY without any sort of protection. I agree it's the parent's job, but since when are parents perfect? If we left parents to their own devices without any sort of regulation or standard, we'd have a lot more f**ked up people in this world.
 
Back
Top