Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site druxo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!drutx!druxo!nap
From: nap@druxo.UUCP (Parsons)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.politics,net.books
Subject: Re: Beyond Marchionni and Dubuc (and Winslow) [PORNOGRAPHY]
Message-ID: <795@druxo.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 31-Jan-85 11:58:27 EST
Article-I.D.: druxo.795
Posted: Thu Jan 31 11:58:27 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Feb-85 00:48:38 EST
References: <434@pyuxd.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver
Lines: 47
Xref: watmath net.women:4325 net.politics:7292 net.books:1353

Rosen:
>                                ...The fact remains, just because some
> utterance or action is deemed to be degrading does NOT necessarily mean that
> it MUST be eradicated through censorship or whatever.

Parsons:
Some of my comments are certainly vulnerable to being interpreted as
supporting censorship.  Sorry.  I'm not arguing for censorship, but for an
understanding of why I find pornography (as I define it :-)) degrading.
...

Rosen:
>                                        Greed alone is not a vice that is
>to be eliminated, especially not in a capitalist economy.

Parsons:
I've often pondered that.  Greed is an ugly character trait, but most
economies (not just capitalist) depend on it and great harm would come to
many millions without it.

Parsons:
>>                            ...we do already outlaw particular types of work
>> (e.g., drug dealing)...
>>                                                             ...All of the
>> arguments I've heard so far about why pornography should be allowed would
>> also apply to drug dealing.  One might argue that one is more harmful than
>> the other, but where does one draw the line?

Rosen:
>                                                           ...One "draws the
>line" at acts that involve direct harm, like murder or theft or assault.  To
>try to draw it anywhere "further back" is going to lead to problems, without
>solving the problems you started out with.

Parsons:
Are you saying that selling drugs to an adult is an act that involves
direct harm?

Rosen:
>[P.S.  Given the fact that many have expressed NONinterest in this discussion,
> where is it actually proper to continue it?

Parsons:
Me, too.

Nancy Parsons
AT&T ISL