Evil usually works by taking some kind of cirtue and turning it to the
service of injury, in the name of protection, destruction, in the name
of protection, lies, in teh name of truth. SURE Senator foghorn, we
understand you want to protect us from the CROSSIVE EVIL of the
uninvited sight of a revolting human TIT, besides, it distracts us
from watching all the action on the news tonight of all them people
over THERE getting the shit shot out of the- for a good cause of
course- right there on my TV tube. But I remember with some trembling
that some of us sickos LIKE to look at tits! Well, it's for our own
good, so it must be ok.
And of course, RADICAL political concepts. Very disruptive,
disturbing, causes problems, can't have that, espically niow with all
these terrorists. Anything less would be- unpatriotic, maybe even
unAmerican? But surely it's safe to trust a REAL AMERICAN to issue
licenses and stamps; after all, it could NEVER happen HERE...
Who issues the licenses? Who decides? Who gurantees they do it right?
And then we come to the evil of the evil, the worst of the worst.
CAPITALISTS attempting to SELL things BY EMAIL! AAIIIEEEE!!!
LYNCH THEM AT ONCE!
Um, is inviting commerce covered under the ruberic of protected free
speech? Or is it ok to censor on the basis of content when the content
Sure, it's getting service all alogn the path for free. Bill them. No
discrimination please, that's unfair. Samo as for everyone else.
Damn, this is getting intresting, from a sociological and geopolitical
stance. For my own good, of course.
J C Lawrence wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2002 21:50:29 -0700
> Chuq Von Rospach <email@example.com> wrote:
> > As an extreme example -- if a person wants a "proof of license" to
> > send child pornography, it's going to be rejected by any
> > authority. But on a fundamental basis, if you want to avoid censorship
> > or bureaucratic biases of any sort, if the recipient of that e-mail
> > WANTS the kiddie porn, that license should be granted. To do otherwise
> > simply creates a system where you no longer have "send it only if I
> > accept it" but a bureaucracy of some sort that defines "send it only
> > if it's acceptable".
> Its also worth noting that the legal and political temptation and
> rewards to turn the former into the latter effectively guarantee that it
> will be.
> J C Lawrence
> ---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
> firstname.lastname@example.org He lived as a devil, eh?
> http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
Kirk D Bailey
+---------------------"Thou Art Free." -Eris----------------------+
| http://www.howlermonkey.net mailto:email@example.com |
| http://www.tinylist.org +--------+ mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org |
+------------------Thinking| NORMAL |Thinking---------------------+