Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site utcs.uucp
Path: utzoo!utcs!flaps
From: flaps@utcs.uucp (Alan J Rosenthal)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: banning pornography
Message-ID: <886@utcs.uucp>
Date: Wed, 25-Sep-85 23:49:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: utcs.886
Posted: Wed Sep 25 23:49:19 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 26-Sep-85 00:22:15 EDT
References: <70@ucdavis.UUCP> <870@utcs.uucp> <885@ptsfa.UUCP>
Reply-To: flaps@utcs.UUCP (Alan J Rosenthal)
Distribution: net
Organization: University of Toronto - General Purpose UNIX
Lines: 19
Summary: 

>Could you specify what you mean by people-controlled censorship? Does it
>involve private citizens interfering with legally guaranteed rights?
I suppose so.  I don't believe at all in the existing legal system.  I
think it protects big horrible corporations etc etc.

>>More important than the right to free speech is
>>the right to any kind of meaningful life at all, the right not to have people
>>preaching hatred of you.
>More important to whom?   ...
>I never heard of this "right not to have people preaching hatred of
>you".
Well I don't know what the legal situation is in U.S.A... in Canada there
are certainly laws against racist literature etc.  The idea of free speech
is silly to me.  Would you think it was reasonable for someone to start
telling hundreds of people that YOU personally should be killed?  Deny
them the right to do this and you deny them free speech.  But allow them
to do this and there is a legal way to murder.  Which do you choose?  To
me the choice is obvious.  Any reasonable society has to put limits on
so-called "free speech".


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com