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: <898@utcs.uucp>
Date: Thu, 3-Oct-85 20:58:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: utcs.898
Posted: Thu Oct  3 20:58:15 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 3-Oct-85 21:29:27 EDT
References: <885@ptsfa.UUCP> <40400021@uiucdcs>
Reply-To: flaps@utcs.UUCP (Alan J Rosenthal)
Organization: University of Toronto - General Purpose UNIX
Lines: 17
Summary: 

In article <40400021@uiucdcs> mcewan@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU writes:
>>   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".
>
>Would you kill someone because I told you to? If you did, do you think I should
>be charged with the killing?

If someone is of the temperament to kill me, it is more likely that they will
kill me if you encourage them to, then if you didn't.
If they kill me with your encouragement, then there are various arguments about
which of they and you are MORE responsible, but I don't think that there is
much doubt that both of you are responsible to some extent.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com