Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: This "PC" stuff
From: mzener@eagle.wesleyan.edu
Date: 13 Aug 92 12:27:04 EDT
Organization: Wesleyan University

hasn@midway.uchicago.edu (Sheheryar Hasnain) writes:

> Hell if we want to get rid of 
> someone in school or work because they're of color or of a different
> sexual orientation, lets harrass the hell out of them  WITH IMPUNITY!!
> Wow what a great thing freedom is, right,Mike?

   Our society is based on the principle that every member of society has
certain rights, but that these rights will often come into conflict with each
other.  Thus, laws are established to decide how different rights are to be
weighed and balanced against each other.  Everyone has the right to freedom of
speech, but no one has the right not to be offended.  Thus, no law should be
established that says no one person can offend any other.  That law would be
made even worse if it distinguished between kinds of insults (purple people
have the right to poke fun at fuscha people, but not vice versa).
   People have the right to act as they please, but people also have the right
to not have life and property damaged by others.  Thus, I can wave my arms all
over the place, so long as my fist doesn't run into your nose.
   I think I've made my point, but I'll be clear about it:  peoplel have the
right to insult other people on the basis of anything at all.  People don't
have the right to beat up other people, no matter what the reason (self-defense 
obvioulsy excluded).

 ...I believe that I have a right to a "hostility free" workplace 
> BEFORE he has the right to his freedom of speech.  If he makes 
> the environment hostile, he should be fired.

   What if, for example, everyone on the net was made angry by your statements. 
By your own arguement, we should be able to kick you out, just because of what
you have posted.  Now do you see why defenders of free speech put up with
lunkheads from the KKK?

   In reply to that, Sheheryar might reiterate his earlier statement,
       "An opinion contributes to a discussion whereas
        KKK propoganda does not.  It has nothing to contribute to society but
        that of further dividing it."

   To that, I pose these questions:  Is not KKK propaganda the expression of an
opinion?  Proponents of multicultturalism are behaving in ways that divide
society, so should they be punished?  In your post "Gotcha (Re: Summary," and
in e-mail to me, which I shall not quote but will mention becuase it further
defines your chosen role on this net, you allude to purposefully "ruffling
feathers" and stirring up controversy, trying to draw out heated remarks.  Is
that not devisive behavior?  By your own agruements, should we not censor you?


> But thats not what I'm arguing here.The constitution also
> states that all "men are created equal."  Now how can I take, seriously,
> a document that conveniently ignores half the population?

   I thought I had explained this earlier.  First of all, read the
Constitution.  You'll not that the phrase "all men are craeted equal isn't
there.  It's in the Declaration of Independance.  You would do well to remember
this, not only becuase you'd embarass yourself less, but because you would
understand that the Constitution was written by men who were, as Lincoln so   
ably said, "dedicated to the principle that all men were created equal."
   Then learn that in the English language, the male form is the neutered form.
Thus, "all men" can mean "all people."  Do not expect people to abuse the
language in order to meet your sensibilities.  As I said earlier, people have
the right to say whatever they like, and not the right not to be offended.

Max Zener
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct