Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!rutgers!mit-eddie!cybvax0!frog!celtics!roger
From: roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger B.A. Klorese)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: To Post or Not To Post... That's the Moral Issue
Message-ID: <1661@celtics.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 9-Sep-87 21:01:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: celtics.1661
Posted: Wed Sep  9 21:01:00 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Sep-87 07:28:04 EDT
References: <1111@ark.cs.vu.nl>
Reply-To: roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger B.A. Klorese)
Organization: CELERITY (Northeast Area), Framingham, MA
Lines: 15

In article <1111@ark.cs.vu.nl> kleef@cs.vu.nl (Patrick van Kleef) writes:
>If an article is wrong, highly offensive or could lead
>directly to illegal actions (hey, like phonephreaking), the publisher
>should answer for himself in a court of law. But only _after_ publication.

No, the publisher should answer to conscience _before_ publication,
and not publish.  Freedom of the press does not imply that each
publisher must be forced to publish anything by anybody.  Prior restraint
by a court or government is inappropriate; self-censorship by the
individual is necessary.
-- 
 ///==\\   (No disclaimer - nobody's listening anyway.)
///        Roger B.A. Klorese, CELERITY (Northeast Area)
\\\        40 Speen St., Framingham, MA 01701  +1 617 872-1552
 \\\==//   celtics!roger@seismo.CSS.GOV - seismo!celti6'vax.vax