Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!yale!husc6!uwvax!heurikon!mikem
From: mikem@heurikon.UUCP (mikem)
Newsgroups: net.religion,talk.religion
Subject: Re: Banning books, religion etc...
Message-ID: <136@heurikon.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 3-Sep-86 14:14:18 EDT
Article-I.D.: heurikon.136
Posted: Wed Sep  3 14:14:18 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 9-Sep-86 05:18:22 EDT
References: <1637@ames.UUCP> <180@BMS-AT.UUCP> <3554@sdcc3.ucsd.EDU>
Distribution: net
Organization: Heurikon Corp., Madison WI
Lines: 27
Xref: linus net.religion:10726 talk.religion:58



In a discussion on censorship I ran accross the following statement
by za56@sdcc3.ucsd.EDU (Brian McNeill):

> Fine with you Xians...print up a blacklist or something, but banning
                                                               ^^^^^^^
> any (repeat ANY) books/movies infringes upon my 1st amendment rights
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> to free speech.  I (as an atheist) believe humanism is a quite valid

If a book I write is banned, then MY first ammendment right to free
speech has been violated.  If a book YOU have written is banned, then
YOUR first ammendment right to free speech has been violated.

The first ammendment does not say that you have the right to read whatever
you want.  It says that you have the right to write whatever you
want.  (You can get in trouble if you libel someone, however).
In the first case someone would have to be coerced into writing
for you if what you wanted to read hadn't been written.  This would
be violating their rights.

This is a very important distinction.

(By "write" I mean speech, print, movies, etc.)

                                    Michael W. Mayer