children accessing porn; adults turning off filterware

[Dianne L Parham]

I don't think you're talking about children accessing porn.  Do you 
really think most girls have much interest?  Eliminated 50%+ of 
the children who are disinterested females.  Then there are boys who quickly 
recognize pornography is boring and ridiculous and are far 
more interested in sports, science, and other normal events.  So basically 
you are talking about filtering for a minority of male children who want to drive 
their parents crazy because they know this is an issue that they can't 
deal with.  And this minority is forcing filtering onto the majority of 
the public.  So the reason I'm agin it, if not for free speech, is 
because I don't think any minority has the right to make decisions on 
behalf of the majority...especially if that minority is theoretical.  No 
one has given any figures on children accessing pornography.  I suspect 
the main people interested are adult men with low self-esteem and a high 
need to get attention from any source, no matter how pathetic.  Pedofiles, 
who are a real hazard, would be disguised more innocently.  Dianne Parham, 
who as always speaks for herself and not for her organization and happily deletes all flames 
without reading them so she doesn't keep getting angry about this tedious 
subject but goofed this time

On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, earl young wrote:

> Pardon me, but the real issue for this thread is kids and porn.  There
> were a couple of messages from others yesterday stating in passing that
> "there was a case to be made" in favor of allowing such access, and I
> merely asked them to make the case.  This isn't First Amendment, CDA,
> filters, or much of anything else.  I merely wanted to know what the
> case is for such access in libraries.  The excludes access in homes,
> excludes the issue of whether such material belongs on the 'net in
> general, and for that matter anything else.  This isn't rhetoric mpr an
> attempt to diminish rights.  What is the case in favor?
>