Nampa Library takes sex books off the shelves : comments

Return to Nampa Library takes sex books off the shelves

Censorship

The Supreme Court has decided that obscene material is not protected by free speech. But what is obscene? see: Miller v. California (1973)

1: Whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.

2: Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law.

3: Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

I wonder how many literary works fail this test and still on the shelf of the library?

And how many...

...are explicetly illustrated?

I ask

How many killings, rapes, murders, abuse and such are in the current (edited by the way) version of the King James bible? I'm sure those same folks will be down there banning that horrible book.

But does it have

pictures?

...

Etruscan art has pictures of nudity and sex (including some homosexual sex) - are you going to ban a book with pictures of Etruscan vases?

Ode to a

etruscan urn.

And what does the Bible have to do..

With how to books on being GAY? If I not mistaken the book hasn't been "BANNED" it's simple been take away from children...Kinda like, porn, booze, and cigarettes....if you want kids to have stuff like that lets start with yours and see how they turn out.

That line goes way beyond the just "good taste" test

and you know it. I seriously doubt you could find anything in any Idaho public library that would be considered obscene by the courts.

This is right wing censorship by fanatics

We have already told the Library we will no longer make any donations based on their censorship.

for like the third time now...

I bet they will have to shut down within the week without your support.

Neo

You're a legend in your own mind.

Good for you!

What type of books will be targeted next? Books about Muslims, Democrats, or global warming? I am sure that we could all find books that offend us, but this is supposed to be a public library. I am glad to learn that some patrons are taking a stand on censorship. Banning these two books has nothing to do with obscenity, but is an example of right-wing homophobic hyperventilating.

Exactly

The fanatics in the Treasure Valley have gotten a hold and want to cram their fanatic views down every ones throats.

Shame on the Nampa Library for caving in. They will pay because of their lack of donors. Bibles and Books of Mormon only go so far.

Yeah!

Zeke wants more daddy-son gay sex!

Seriously Shazam

that was uncalled for.

Yes, It IS rather repulsive isn't it.

...

How Dare you!

You just proved my point why these X-rated books should be put away from the general public.

You must have one of those perverts standing in the aisle flipping through the pages, afraid to check out the book, because the Liberian would get to see your perverted face for what it really is.

I can only hope you are not a father.

Shame on you!

PollyAnna

Hey Polly

let's play the glad game.

Playing Games

I would prefer not to play any games with you.

I really do cherish the "Mentally Challenged" and would prefer not to play games with them. Thank-You anyway.

PollyAnna :0)

The books were not banned!

They were taken off the shelves where they won't be picked up by casual passers by. Really, people, this is only decent and fitting for a public place. The books are still available upon request. Those wanting to see what the books have to offer can ask for them and check them out just the same as before.
Nobody is cramming anything down your throats and this is far from fanatical. The real down-the -throat-cramming of anything seems to be the open display of these books where anybody passing by is subjected to something best kept private. Yeah, somethings should still be kept private. Come out of the closets if you like but please have the decency to stay in your bedroom. Those with differing values from yours also have a voice which is being heard. The board made a choice that seems sound and shouldn't offend anybody except, maybe, seekers of cheap thrills in the best case and perverts in the worst. If people want and are old enough to view this material by law then by all means check out these "valuable resource" books.
In this country people have a right to read and say what they want to. We have a right to public decency for which we are having to voice our "fanatical" opinion. Sometimes we are misunderstood and often offense is given--somtimes intentionally, which is the wrong approach to any real attempt to communicate, and often unintentionally. Sometimes offense is taken, also an ineffective tool for communication, though offense isn't intended. It seems too frequently the case that someone cries discrimination, repression or censorship to get their own way regardless of the impact or their selfishness.
I live in Nampa and my kids love the Library. I really don't like the idea of my 13-year-old son stumbling across "Daddy son fantasies" in some book with an intriguing title. I just don't think he's ready for that. Anybody who is ready for that or fights for somebody else to be ready for that ought to be ashamed.
Strangely, some posters here who were insensed about the 40-year-old scout/church leader abuse case that recently came to light are the very ones crying for public availability of these materials. I just don't understand. Maybe one day when my fanaticism wears off and my eyes will be opened. But I hope and PRAY that never happens.

Although your argument was

Although your argument was well thought out and I understand the problem you have with your son viewing such material, they tried to ban these books.
Limiting what books are read is an imposition of one value system over another. It seems to me that to have a democracy we have to be tolerant of what others value. No one has tried to force you to expand what you consider permisable, why should others be forced to limit what they read? It is your and your family's right to narrow what media you view. It is not the general publics burden to censore itself to fit your wants.

I completely agree.

You state "It seems to me that to have a democracy we have to be tolerant of what others value."
I'm tolerant of what others value but my values seem to be subject to ridicule and prejudice. The books are still available. Stop the whining already! There was just a compromise made that should please two reasonable parties. The free-speech-at-all-cost fanatics just keep whining though.
If I'm leading my family along a nature trail and we come across a rattlesnake coiled up in the middle of the path we could certainly all walk around it but I'm concerned for those that follow me who might be overcome with curiosity or who might be in the wrong place if the snake strikes. If I can I'll move the snake to some place more fitting. Others might shoot the snake and still others might feel they haven't experienced enough to make a decision until they and their families have been bitten. If you really want to experience snake bite go where the snakes are.
Taking this analogy a bit further we might consider that there is a use for rattlesnakes. We need their venom to make anti-venom and they also help take care of rats and other rodents.
You can go still go to the circulation desk to get bitten or get your antivenom. My family and I can walk through the library a bit more at ease.

Casual passerby

You don't see the dichotomy in what you write?

Nobody is cramming anything down your throats and this is far from fanatical. The real down-the -throat-cramming of anything seems to be the open display of these books where anybody passing by is subjected to something best kept private.

So if you're doing the cramming it's OK; if I am, it's not.

See - that's what a library is about, a place of books a repository in which everyone in the community can come and read.

Your 13 year-old son should ALREADY know about sex, how babies are born, his body, etc. YOU should have either taken him thru a program or explained much of this yourself. We took our children at the ages of 9 and 10 for sex education classes. We talked about various things. If your son gets a hold of book as you describe it then it YOUR responsibility as a parent. Stop passing your responsibility to the schools, teachers, librarians, passersby, the mail carrier - everyone BUT you.

The fanaticism comes when you or anyone else want to control every freakin' aspect of society to meet your so-called values. I'm not interested.

doc, eh? Of What?

Dichotomy is in the eye of the beholder.
Again, the choice is still there for those who want to "check out" these books. I wouldn't see it as cramming it down my throat if someone was to move "The Holy Bible" to the circulation desk because someone argues that kids otherwise would be leafing through the pages and filling their minds with fanatical stuff. Don't be so paranoid. I usually do my scripture study at home anyway because it's a priority to me.
I don't personally see the benefit of having sex materials in the public library. I've heard there are several good books on improvised explosives our there. Do they belong in the library? They both have their purpose, place and time but do we need to have them in the library? I'm fond of explosives but I'm ok with the fact that there are no books on the subject in the library, even at the circulation desk. If I really want to know more I can find the info.
Now, you little hasty-generalizing, self-important twitt of a "doc," my son and I have had an open dialogue about sex since he was 8 years old. I didn't take him to the "birds and bees" courses and call it done. We still talk about whatever questions come up: sex, drugs, friends, girls, life etc. Yes, I actually still can and do enjoy talking with my teenager!
As for wanting to "control every freakin' aspect of society" that's a boat we apparently share with perhaps equal fanaticism. You and many other posters here want things your way, I and others want them ours but since we are all in the same public boat together it seems to make the best sense to compromise. The books are in a more appropriate place where they are now--not on the shelves and not banned. What is wrong with that? And why are my values "so called" just because you don't think you agree with them? We probably see much more eye to eye if generalizations, prejudice and paranoia are put aside.
Let calmer heads prevail.

Zeke

The library is not the one who made the decision. The board members (of which, the ones who voted against the books were all appointed within the past two years) were the ones who decided. The article specifically states that the library staff were against banning the books. This is Ivory Tower management at its finest.

That"s OK

After reading this I called the library and told them I will donate double what ever Zeke has been donating.

brother...

...can you spare a dime?

The lack of my support and many others will be felt

But maybe the donated Bibles and Book of Mormons will make up for it.

Removal of library books (sexual)

Suggestion, send them to the nearest Adult Book Store. It's not censuring, it's having morals and values and respect for the families of the community. There is a place for those kind of books, and people like zekenaja can spend his off-time hours going to those shops. It is more appropriate to keep the libraries geared to families, not encourage adult fantasies and promote sexual behavior.

Censorship

I understand parents concern for not wanting to expose their children to sexual material, however these same parents will let their children walk into Barnes and Nobles, where a child can just as easily pick up a book about sex.

From what I got from the article, I believe the books are still available to the public but the public will have to ask for them. That in itself could be a type of censorship, because how many adults will be to embarrassed to ask?

Too embarrassing to ask...

So that would justify making these books available to children?

children in libraries

I don't think children should be in libraries. When they do go, they are disruptive. They are not there to learn. Maybe there should be an adult library and a kiddie library instead of removing the books? I am sorry if you cannot see the potentional psychological and political censorship that may arise from having adults ask.

I **sort of* agree here

There's an age that kids should be there, like going out to eat, that they are mature enough to handle a public place. Books should not be censored, period, in any case at all.

Or maybe people with a

Or maybe people with a problem with kids should not go out of thier house.

Yep, let any anybody read/look at whatever is printed

The child molesting scout/church leader might find "The Joy of Gay Sex" very intriguing. You make a very interesting point.

You sure know a lot about children.

My kids love the library and they usually check out one to five books when we go; what a wonderful resource. And you know what? They are even respectful and quiet. It's a little thing we do in our home called teaching and we do it by guidance and example. Oh and we take our children to CHURCH too. No, they're not perfect, just like their parents, but they are turning out better than we were at that age.
In effect there is an adult library behind the circulation desk now. We just need to add a bunch more books and videos to that area. This is a great idea!
And, WOW, I would hate to see "potentional psychological and political censorship that may arise from having adults ask." I'm not sure what you are saying here but I think I understand and think it's rediculous. If an adult is truly and adult there should be no problem taking responsibility and accountability if a cheap thrill is wanted or if curiosity is screaming for answers. Adult is the key word and to qualify as an "adult" you...um, I mean...anybody must take responsibility regardless of the "potentional psychological and political censorship that may arise from having adults ask."
Just my opinion.

You should steer your

You should steer your children to the history section. Since your views are in line with those of Adolf Hitler they might like to learn what Mommy believes in.

Yeah! Good old Hitler...

...you silly generalization nazi you.
Hitler burned books. I'm not for that. Silly. I just think it's prudent to "monitor" these "resources" in the public library where they won't be kept from inquiring minds legally old enough to know. I'll teach my own kids to be wise and when they are older they can make more of their own choices.
Hitler was also fond of manipulation. He saw no place for compromise. I'm not opposed to compromise. Are you?

If you are against the first

If you are against the first amendment you are in line with the thoughts of the Nazi party, period. You can sugar coat it anyway you want but those of us that are American and believe in free speech are against you and "your" kind. I am actually happy you are in Canyon Co. It gives me another reason not to cross the line and visit you hill-billies out there in 2C country

I love the first amendment.

It is a wonderful blessing. One particular ruling addresses children and pornography. It's intent is to protect children from exploitation. In my opinion a child might be considered as exploited not only if he/she is the subject of pornography (of course it might not be considered pornography by some extremists if it is artistic and tasteful in nature--a whole new can of worms that should never but will likely be opened someday in the name of the first amendment) but also if he/she is subject to pornography. These books are of no benefit to children who might open their pages period.
Call me a Nazi if you want. I'm no book burner and I have no desire to police or control thought other than my own. I do want some say in the material available to my children as they are still my responsibility. They have exposure in school to all kinds of thought and speech and we talk about it when they get home.
I doubt the average present day American is what the framers of the constitution had in mind when they provided so much rope. Are you a flag burner too? Long live freedom of speech.

Children need the libraries. They need control in

the library. In most libraries there is the kiddie area and the adult section. All library visitors need to be in relative comfort and security. This problem should not even have happened, unless someone left the books in a area open to young kids. "Perhaps somebody set up the library."

My readings are political, medical, and contemporary

I have Sydney Blumenthal, William Buckley, and Michael Savage. I love nutrition books.

Dr. Savage has intrigued me with food replacements rather than using drugs.

So Brandi and Bryan can be the sex monitors on the Nampa Library. I guess Nampa wants the title of sex clearinghouse of Canyon County.

My books will go to the library in Boise City. Those sexually obsessed in Nampa can sit there and ponder sex books.

Our books will go elsewhere.

If you don't make these books...

...available to children, I will take my vast wealth of books elsewhere.

Ha ha. Deep reading there,

Ha ha.

Deep reading there, with Buckley and Savage. Those are some real intellectual heavyweights.

If you censor, yes I will take my books elsewhere

I have every right to do so. Nampa can sit there and be the sex thought police all they want and obsess to the nth degree.

That's their right. I guess. Censorship by a governmental division. I would hope that a taxing entity would be more open minded. If they want to dwell on sex, let them do so. We're just not buying into it.

Careful zek

You could be starting a new mission (used that word on purpose) to ban the classics. You know, like Huckleberry Finn, Uncle Tom's Cabin and 1984.

Of course you have every right to do so.

Just do so and stop your censorship paranoyed babble. Nobody is removing these books. Those adults that want access to them have access to them.

Hey Bruce Skaug

Hey Mr. Skaug, theoretically, somebody might wonder about your adventures on top of the Safeway walk-in cooler/freezer? Theoretically, somebody could ask whether you're protecting the public from immorality. I'm curious, do you happen to attend the same church as Larry Craig and Elliott Spitzer?

jasongiraffe@aol.com

I'll be the first to admit

That this guy is a wingnut of the first order. But he is supplying his e-mail address. Either a set the size of melons, or not very bright!
As long as the books in question are still available, I fail to see the position that they have been "banned". I don't have a problem with limiting the access to adults, as long as they are available anytime the library is open to the public. I can't buy the arguement that someone would be too embarrased to ask for the books. If that is the case, the arguement for their limited access has just been made.

Well, Does He?

Does Mr. Skaug attend the same church as Lusty Larry Craig and Elliott Spitzer?