WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Internet pornography is turning America's public libraries into virtual "peep shows" open to children and funded by taxpayers.

Compare two libraries: Minneapolis and St. Paul. Seven Minneapolis librarians filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission because of the hostile and offensive working environment caused by daily exposure to Internet porn. Sex offenders congregate; six-year-olds view hard-core porn; child porn is left on printers; men masturbate; a porn surfer brandishes a knife.

This doesn't happen at St. Paul, because "the library considers the Internet a limited resource and porn is inconsistent with its mission."

A new study published by Family Research Council, "Dangerous Access 2000 Edition: Uncovering Internet Pornography in America's Libraries", documents more than 2,000 incidents in libraries of adults and children accessing pornography, sexual harassment and other sex crimes, and convicted pedophiles trading child porn.

For this we can thank the American Library Association (ALA) and its adamant opposition to filters.

The ALA, a private trade association, believes minors have a right to access any material, including child porn, bestiality, sexual torture, orgies, and bathroom sex.

It's in its Bill of Rights, even though the group has admitted that the First Amendment does not protect such material. Judith Krug, director of the ALA Office of Intellectual Freedom, says, "Blocking material leads to censorship. That goes for pornography and bestiality, too. If you don't like it, don't look at it ... Every time I hear someone say, I want to protect the children, I want to pull my hair out."

Even porn industry lobbyist Mike Ross said, "Breasts belong in the library, but they belong in the health section. I'm not going to stand up in front of a committee and say I want porn in libraries. These guys would not even talk to me if I was stupid enough to say porn belongs in libraries." Apparently, it's not too stupid for the ALA.

A library is not a public forum open to all forms of expression. There is no constitutional requirement for government to provide access to illegal pornography such as obscenity and child pornography in libraries simply because it provides Internet access.

As an agency of government, a library board has the right to determine that the forum it provides the public for Internet access is a nonpublic forum.

"The state has power to preserve the property under its control for the use to which it is lawfully dedicated," according to Kreimer v. Bureau of Police for Town of Morristown, as cited in Mainstream Loudoun v. Board of Trustees of the Loudoun County Library -- a case filtering opponents love to cite, but not for this point.

Access in a nonpublic forum can be restricted if the restrictions are "reasonable." Furthermore, Loudoun acknowledges that "minimizing access to illegal pornography and avoidance of creation of a sexually hostile environment are compelling governmental interests."

While filtering isn't perfect, it's better than the ALA's "acceptable use polices." Furthermore, its bogus objections, such as "breast cancer information is blocked by filters," have been debunked. Inappropriately blocked sites can be unblocked within minutes by a librarian.

Have you ever waited two weeks for a book that was checked out or been told that a book wasn't available because it hadn't met the library's selection criteria? That's not unconstitutional. Neither is blocking illegal smut.