26 Jun 2003 @ 10:20 AM
The Washington Dispatch – Opinion
“A law that prohibits reading without official consent, like a law that prohibits speaking without official consent,” said Justice John Paul Stevens in his dissent, “constitutes a dramatic departure from our national heritage and constitutional tradition.” But this court is forging a new tradition.
Previous 
Next 
Categories
Tag Cloud
Blog RSS
Comments RSS
Last 50 Posts
Back
Void 
Life 
Earth 
Wind 
Water 
Fire
One of the things I found most interesting about this article, is the whole issue of porn in the library…for one, do THAT many people go to the library just to download porn? Two, if they succeed with all these filters, are that many people REALLY going to go to the librarian and ask to have the porno filters turned off?
Mind you, I’m keeping that seperate from the whole constitutional issues at hand. Mostly because, I see porn as a gray area that doesn’t necessarily deserve constitutional protection, but also shouldn’t be illegal.