the issue is spending tax money on playboy

wednesday, september 28, 2005

it is not a matter if one is offended by playboy , it is a matter of subsidizing intentional pornography with our tax dollars. for all that may be jaded, let's be clear: playboy is pornography, and it caters to the prurient interest. playboy is a potential sexual stimulant for sex offenders, pedophiles and child molesters. also, it exploits young beautiful women, selling their bodies for money. playboy is by definition obscene. remember, one librarian 30 years ago chose playboy to be part of the oak lawn library magazine collection .

if one orders a subscription to the pornographic magazine playboy, that is his right. the majority of oak lawn residents resent the fact that the oak lawn library board of trustees refuses to hear their voices and remove the magazine . no tax-funded porno.

i never advocated removing anything from the library other than playboy. i've learned a lot about our library since last spring. and i would request that folks like ms. naomi miller ( public forum, sept. 22 ) would get their facts straight before writing a letter to the editor based on second-hand information and therefore misrepresenting me and making me out to be a fool. and please stop calling me a would-be-censor. i petitioned my government, the library, with a redress of grievances. that is my first amendment right as a concerned parent. i feel that children and women are not as safe as they can be with playboy in the library. just call me censor, because i am.

no, i do not trust people who look at intentional pornography such as playboy in the public library. buy your own smut if you need it for research. if you can't afford it, tough luck.

the eileen byrne radio show on wls 890 am invited me on for an interview regarding this matter . the producer went on to an abc-owned filtered computer and typed in "breast cancer" and no porn sites came up. eileen remarked that filters seem to work. my point was before the producer did this was that all library computers should have permanent filters blocking hardcore porn from all patrons, children and adults. not to prevent people from doing legitimate research. patrons can research breast cancer on library computers and consult their physicians. i may be offensive to people like ms. naomi miller, but she and others of the same frame of mind will have to explain to me and my supporters why playboy depicts grown women with shaved genitals that resemble a child's. one answer, perverts. playboy does not belong in a library.

still not convinced that the oak lawn public library is not a safe place for children? are they intentionally keeping all options open to indoctrinate children sexually ? call them and ask why children have access to the gay and lesbian lifestyle magazine the advocate . don't you think that magazine should be behind the counter? also ask, "why don't you have permanent filters on all computers?" kids can gain access to porn sites by turning off the filters, and so can adults. permanent filters work, and for as little as $6 a month, the library can be a safer place for all. i challenge each of you to research the children's and juvenile section of your library . some kids books include the most vile obscene language you have ever heard. also, some books teach youngsters about such things as bestiality, incest, rape, homosexual relationships for kids that are pre-teen. perhaps there is a real problem that needs to be addressed to protect children.

mark decker
oak lawn

[ source url ]