Xref: utzoo misc.kids:9322 news.misc:3085 misc.misc:6424 talk.politics.misc:27325
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!bbn!bbn.com!cosell
From: cosell@bbn.com (Bernie Cosell)
Newsgroups: misc.kids,news.misc,misc.misc,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: alt.sex to become illegal in New Jersey?
Message-ID: <40829@bbn.COM>
Date: 2 Jun 89 14:35:27 GMT
References: <3246@looking.UUCP> <MSB.89May17140400@ho5cad.att.com> <3425@tank.uchicago.edu> <5525@bnrmtv.UUCP> <3506@tank.uchicago.edu> <21646@mcdchg.chg.mcd.mot.com>
Sender: news@bbn.COM
Reply-To: cosell@BBN.COM (Bernie Cosell)
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Lines: 20

In article <21646@mcdchg.chg.mcd.mot.com> heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby) writes:
}I think that it is very sad that so many people on the net confuse
}the exercise of property rights with censorship.

I don't think anyone is doing anything of the kind.  The law in question
_could_ make it *illegal* to carry alt.sex.  No property rights, no choice on
the part of the sysadmins or the folks that read news.  ARREST for
distributing obscene material if you send alt.sex to the next guy down the
line.  ARREST for distributing obscene material (and maybe corrupting the
morals of a minor) if you allow your users to read alt.sex

Of course a sysadmin can choose not to carry any newsgroup they please for
any reason they please, and that's just too bad for the admin's users and the
folks downstream.  No problem there.  The *problem* is when sysadmins are
*coerced* not to carry a newsgroup because of threat of legal action.

This thread, at it says clearly, is "...to become illegal...", NOT "... will
not longer be distributed...".

  /Bernie\