Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rochester.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!ray
From: ray@rochester.UUCP (Ray Frank)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: Possible Ban on Pornography
Message-ID: <11317@rochester.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 2-Sep-85 10:46:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: rocheste.11317
Posted: Mon Sep  2 10:46:54 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Sep-85 05:22:26 EDT
References: <369@scirtp.UUCP> <1625@ihuxl.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U. of Rochester, CS Dept.
Lines: 28

> > .....
> > Subject: DON'T TRY TO BAN PORNOGRAPHY!! IT WON'T WORK!!
> > ......
> 
> 
> Just in case no one agrees with what you said in this article, 
> I whole-heartedly AGREE!!  I am quite concerned that very few people
> realize what the effect of banning pornography would be on the free
> press.
> 
> 				Kim Tracy
> 				AT&T Bell Laboratories
> 
Just to balance things out, I disagree.  We must ban pornography.  Before
porn the free press was just that free, when porn is banned the free press
will be just that free.  Try if you can not to have such GLOBAL thinking
processes, i.e. if this happens then all that will happen.  
We as intelligent rational beings can surely make guidelines differenciating
between watching people take a shit in a porn movie and the more wholesome free
media enlightening us to local and world events.

There is an organization in Boston who advocates legalizing sex with children of
any age, but in particular with their own children whom they claim are theirs to
do with as they sexually please and should not be governed by outside sex laws.
Your irrational 'global thinking' would say we must not interfer with these
people in Boston, for if the government prevents their freedom of sexual ex-
pression then we will surely be next.  I say bullshit.  We are more intelligent
than that, at least most of us are.