HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rwd4f@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (Rob Dobson)
Subject: Re: what good will come of this
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:21:18 GMT

In article <niklasf.3.720965541@dhhalden.no> niklasf@dhhalden.no (NIKLAS FREDN) writes:
>I don't know if this has been brought up yet (or if there is reason
>to), but as I have understood Clinton's vice president, Gore, is 
>married to Tipper Gore!?
>
>It's been a while since I've heard anything from her, but doesn't she
>want to ban just about everything she finds offensive? How will the
>situation in the US become now when she's got one foot in the 
>White House?
>
Yes, tipper gore was involved in PMRC, a group which attempted to
force record companies to label their 'offensive' records.

Unwise? yes
censorious?  yes

BUT: 1) Even at her most censorious, tipper has nothing on the republicans,
who feel that burning a piece of cloth with a certain pattern on it is
so offensive that it deserves a constitutional amendment to ban it.
And the Meese commission, whos main result was to intimidate 7-11 stores
into not selling playboy (thanks, ed, i feel so much safer. was that gunfire
i heard in the distance?)

2) the wife of the vice-president is not exactly a powerful figure here.
youll just have to trust me on this one.


Xref: sparky alt.censorship:8613 alt.conspiracy:11903 talk.politics.misc:58359 alt.activism:18414
From: rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc,alt.activism
Subject: Re: [alt.conspiracy, et al.] Censoring John Dinardo Violates Constitutional Law
Date: 6 Nov 92 00:36:53 GMT
Organization: Memes-R-Us
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

rlcarr@athena.mit.edu (Richard L. Carreiro) writes:

>>To censor John Dinardo is a complete violation of the
>>Freedom of Speech amendment in the Bill of Rights of the
>>Constitution.

>How on earth do you figure this?  As I understand it, AT&T removed his
>net access.  AT&T is NOT a governmental entity.  The Bill of Rights
>is thus irrelevant here.

Hardly. AT&T exists within the context of the United States.

In any case, singling out one individual for his political stance does
not bode well for the rest of us.


-- richard

-- 
=====
-- richard childers		rchilder@us.oracle.com		1 415 506 2411
         oracle data center  --  unix systems & network administration
                    Klein flask for rent. Inquire within.
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: A Comment on A Local Talk Show
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 08:40:20 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.133929.19822@athena.mit.edu> wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.205706.7111@rock.concert.net>, barber@jazz.concert.net (Scott Barber) said:

>> > Sounds to me as though you're advocating the censorship of the
>> > expression of ideas and beliefs.  Not good.  [wdstarr]

>> For me, though, I'd point out that there is a huge gulf of a
>> difference between the free expression of IDEAS and BELIEFS and the
>> advocacy of violence, indeed murder, on the public airwaves.

>I don't see that "huge gulf of a difference" that you speak of.  "We
>should kick all the <ethnics> out of the country," "Those <ethnics>
>are sick, twisted perverts, and even "I'd like to see a hundred
><ethnics> hanging dead from lamp-posts" _are_ ideas and beliefs...
>ideas and beliefs that may make you or me throw up, but ideas and
>beliefs nonetheless.

Ditto.

>> There are protections against people yelling "Fire!" in crowded
>> theatres.  This seems to be a wise restriction on public expression,
>> and I don't believe our freedom of speech suffers from it.

>No, the protections are against _falsely_ shouting "Fire!" in crowded
>theaters, which is a very different thing.  When someone says, either
>explicitly or implicitly, "It's my opinion that...", there usually
>isn't any falsehood involved (or, at the very least, it's going to
>be damn difficult to prove falsehood, in a court of law or elsewhere).

Actually, the quote is "falsely shouting fire in a theater AND CAUSING a
panic." Something which is highly relevant, IMO.  It has to be false 
AND it has to do harm.

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Mike Mussina 1992 AL Cy Young Winner
niepornt@phoenix.    |------------------------------------ 
   princeton.edu     | "I still believe in a place called Hope."
Clinton/Gore '92.  Don't stop thinking about tomorrow.
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.discrimination
From: n8843528@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Chris M. Jacques)
Subject: Re: Fundamentalist Nightmare
Organization: Western Washington University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:52:53 GMT

grimlok@hubcap.clemson.edu (Mike Percy) writes:

>v090lqag@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Shawn S Seymour) writes:

>> I am sooooo sick and tired of white homosexual tight ass fagots likening their
>> plight to that of the African-American just to get our support. There is a
>> difference, a huge one.  And if I honestly have to sit here and explain it
>> to you, you are as dumb as I thought.  The white man brought my ancestors 
>> over to this country against thier wills, beat my fathers, raped my mothers,
>> and never once apologized for it. Not like did to the Jews for Hitler ( which,
>> by the way happened in germany.  The Japanese, for WWII) need I  go on.
> 
>Excuse me?   Nothing like a little one-brush painting.  The white man?
>I'm a white man;  I never brought anyone here against their will;  I
>never beat anyone, nor raped anyone; my ancestors didn't either
>(arriving in this country well after slavery had ended).  Don't paint me
>with your "white-man" brush.  I've nothing to apologize for, and refuse
>to be browbeaten into taking the blame for those who do.

I agree. It seems to me that Shawn has a chip on his shoulder. Y'know I
think people are so sick and tired of having race thrown in their face. Even
tho I don't have a damn thing to do with it, I'm sorry blacks e were
enslaved and treated as they were. It was absolutely disguasting. But you
know, just abi about every group has been discriminated against at one time
or another be it Blacks,
Jews,women,Latinos,Gays,Italian-Americans,Asian-Americans, Catholics etc.
etc. I think it is timw time we quit whining and crying the oh poor me
shit and quit blaming our problems on another group, whites for instance. I
mean Shawn, are you so oppressed? Everyone has been a victim of
discrimination and racism at one point or another. Yes even whites Shawn..To
move forward with race relations, we can't go back. C'mon Shawn, let's stand
up and quti (quit) blaming everyone else. It's just too easy...
>> Actually I wish I could but I hAVE Class right now.  Let me just say that
>> homosexuality is choice! Have to go.  Feel free to respond.
> 
>That remains to be determined.  

>Mike Percy             | grimlok@hubcap.clemson.edu  | I don't know about
>Sr. Systems Analyst    | mspercy@clemson.clemson.edu | your brain, but mine
>Info. Sys. Development | mspercy@clemson.BITNET      | is really...bossy.
>Clemson University     | (803) 656-3780              | (Laurie Anderson)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.sex,soc.culture.japan
From: biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel)
Subject: Re: Genitals in Japan(was Madonna...)
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:52:58 GMT

tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:

>In article <Bx496F.CHE@cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>>obscene.  The Court ruled that material is legally obscene if: (1) the
>>average person, applying contemporary community standards, would
>>conclude that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient
>>interests; (2) it depicts sexually explicit conduct, specifically
>>defined by law, in a patently offensive manner; and (3) it lacks
>>serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.  The
>>_Miller_ test is still the law today.

>I've wondered why porn publishers don't use element (3) of the Miller
>test to get around obscenity laws.  Say that some community decides that
>your magazine, "Young and Shaved," is obscene.  Why not come out with a
>new magazine: "Shakespear Illustrated: Volume 1: Hamlet".  Illustrations
>consist of the pictures from "Young and Shaved" with captions such as
>"The Queen of Denmark Plays With Her Dildo."  The text of Shakespear is
>public domain, so they are free to use it, and who could argue that
>there is no serious literary value in such a work?

An old ploy that was used during the early '70's. Rather than Shakespeare,
though, they published allegedly educational material, complete with
photographs of various sexual practices. It turned out not to be necessary
to continue to disguise the stuff like this, and they went to the present
arguably less hypocritical format. Thus "Nazi Enema", "Dwarf Rape" and
"Great Dane in the Morning".

Regards,
       H. Biesel
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.sex,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: uk02700@mik.uky.edu (mitchell e french)
Subject: Re: "Gay rights group files complaint"
    <1992Oct30.183836.19273@news2.cis.umn.edu> 
    <1992Nov6.150806.12370@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
X-Path: uk02700
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 20:22:09 GMT

In <1992Nov6.150806.12370@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> ric@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Graffiti 404-972-4999) writes:

>In article <1992Oct30.183836.19273@news2.cis.umn.edu> olivier@everest.ee.umn.edu (Olivier Meirhaeghe) writes:
>>	Gays are product of Evil 

>So, fungus =can= type....

	But of course!
>-- 
> -Ric     __                       __                                 __
>          \/   ric@gnu.ai.mit.edu  \/   Graffiti BBS  404 972-4999    \/
>                 GEnie: GRAFFITI      PO Box 3176, Lithonia GA 30058
***************************TANSTAAFL************************************
*Mushroom             *     >  B4 f w cd g+ k+ s+ r- p co+ dr-   <     *
*Mitchell E. French   * "The brim of my hat hides the eyes of a beast  *
*uk02700@ukpr.uky.edu *    I've the face of a sinner,           __     *
*uk02700@mik.uky.edu  *      But the hands of a priest..."      \/     *
*UK English major     *           -- Sting, "Moon Over Bourbon Street" *
***********************FORNIT*SOME*FORNUS*******************************

Xref: sparky alt.censorship:8770 alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:3373
From: s_titz@ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: Definition & implication of censorship (was Re: Hitler's 'Mein Kampf')
Date: 12 Nov 1992 08:52:45 GMT
Organization: Fachschaft math/inf, Uni Karlsruhe, FRG
NNTP-Posting-Host: irau29.ira.uka.de

In article <3068@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> joemays@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Joseph F. Mays) writes:
>In article <s0454850.20.0@let.rug.nl> s0454850@let.rug.nl (J.P. Prenger) writes:
>>	'Where does censorship start
>
>With someone, anyone, thinking that an idea is so dangerous or offensive
>that it is necessary to ask the government to step in and prevent that
>idea from being expressed.

It needs not necessarily a government being involved, change that for
'authority' (of whatever, maybe dubious kind...)

Examples include teachers (censoring student newsletters in high
schools - this is in fact *required by law* in some places in Germany,
which has a Constitution Article against censorship) or Computer
Center managers (sometimes even operators)...

>
>>        & where does it stop?'
>
>With government control of ideas, thought, and expression.

With *control* of ideas, thought and expression, not limited to such
action being taken by a Government.

>
>>An example: as far as I know, the only book in Holland which is forbidden 
>>by the law is Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf'. There are people here, who think that 
>>you shouldn't do that. On the contrary, this book should be used 
>>in schools, to show how easy something can start & how terrible it can 
>>end (did it ever end? --> several anti-semitic & racial fights in Germany, 
>>Italy, a bomb in a mosk in Holland, etc.)
>
>Actually, "Mein Kampf" was in our high school library (the high school
>I went to was kind of strange...).  I read it.  It taught me why fascism
>is wrong.  It also taught me that Mr. Schicklegruber was no better a 
>writer than he was a painter.

And his artistic and literary work may well have been forgotten and
much mess had been saved if he had not done the very worst and come up
with *politics*... ('And then I decided to become a politician.')

In Germany we had recently some irritation about a professor of
Philosophy who quoted lengthy excerpts from 'Mein Kampf' in his
lectures. He can not be stopped from doing so, but doubts remain about
his claimed honest intentions to show his students how bad thoughts
that are.

My opinion on that issue is that even in this case, the banning of
books is *not* beneficial. 

Olaf

-- 
| Olaf Titz - comp.sc.student  |   o     | uknf@dkauni2.bitnet | old address |
| univ. of karlsruhe - germany |  _>\ _  | s_titz@ira.uka.de   | is still    |
| +49-721-60439                | (_)<(_) | praetorius@irc      | valid       |
   "Stop talkin' and start chalkin'!" - Eight Ball Deluxe
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Hitler's 'Mein Kampf'
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:59:19 GMT

s0454850@let.rug.nl (J.P. Prenger) writes:
>An example: as far as I know, the only book in Holland which is forbidden 
>by the law is Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' (probably translated in English 
>as 'My camp'  or something like that). 

      In Holland?  That's suprising; is there fear of a local Nazi movement?
That seems unlikely.

      Incidentally, it's "My Struggle" in English.  Hitler wrote it in
prison after his first major efforts at political organizing didn't work out.
One of the great cynical political books.  Belongs alongside "The Prince",
"Plunkett of Tammany Hall", and "An American Life".

					John Nagle
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc,alt.activism
From: cole@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Sandra Stewart-Cole)
Subject: Re: [alt.conspiracy, et al.] Censoring John Dinardo Violates 
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 21:10:43 GMT

In <1992Nov6.003653.8048@oracle.us.oracle.com> rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard 
Childers) writes:

>rlcarr@athena.mit.edu (Richard L. Carreiro) writes:


>>How on earth do you figure this?  As I understand it, AT&T removed his
>>net access.  AT&T is NOT a governmental entity.  The Bill of Rights
>>is thus irrelevant here.

>Hardly. AT&T exists within the context of the United States.


Excuse me, but the freedom of speech is just that: go out and talk. Freedom of
the Press applies to those who have a press. AT&T owns the system Mr. DiNardo 
was using to put this stuff onto Usenet. They pay for it. Every byte he puts 
out they pay for. If he gets access yanked, it is perfectly legal. If he wants
to post his material to Usenet, he is free to invest his own time and money in
getting his own uucp node and connections and start putting it out on his own 
nickel. AT&T (or even whoever is your net feed) can filter whatever data passes
thru their hands for submission, and the law doesn't care. (unless of course 
somewhere they have promised not to, in which case it STILL is not a rights 
issue but a contract issue)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: tsdavies@rodan.syr.EDU (T.S. Davies)
Subject: Re: Impressions
In-reply-to: evorst@ccu.umanitoba.ca's message of Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:34:29 GMT
Organization: Sam Hill Cabal, DS
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 22:58:14 EST

In article <BxIupI.LoB@ccu.umanitoba.ca> evorst@ccu.umanitoba.ca
 (Ed Vorst) writes:

> Hi there. I'm new to this group so this already may be a discussed
> topic, but I was wondering if anybody out there has looked at the
> "Impressions" reading book series for children?  From what I
> understand, this is quite the hot topic in California and Alberta and
> I was just wondering what all the fuss is about.

The _Impressions_ series, published by Holt, Rinehart and Winston
(which is based in Canada), has come under fire by right-wing
Christianist organizations (especially the Eagle Forum (Phyllis
Schlafly), Concerned Women for America (Beverly LaHaye), Citizens for
Excellence in Education (Robert Simonds), American Family Association
(Donald Wildmon), and Focus on the Family (James Dobson) -- not only
for its alleged promotion of "New Age religion", but, in an earlier
edition, for promoting "Canadianisms".

_Impressions_ allegedly contains many references to witchcraft and
Satanism -- between 3% and 52% of its 822 selections according to
various sources.  Protests have been made in several states, including
California, South Dakota, New York, and Ohio.  A lawsuit filed by the
AFA, _Brown v. Woodland Joint Unified School District_, with a
petition filed by parents in support of the series by People For the
American Way, is pending in the United States Court for the Eastern
District of California.

See pp. 170-174 in:

DelFattore, Joan
	1992	_What Johnny Shouldn't Read: Textbook Censorship in America_.  
		New Haven (CT): Yale University Press.

(ISBN: 0-300-05709-1)

--
I'm enthralled by combine harvesters. In fact, I yearn to have one -- as a pet.
	From _The Day of the Jackal_
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    T.S. Davies		tsdavies@mailbox.syr.edu		SHC, DS
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: mtan@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Maureen Tan)
Subject: Re: A gender neutral pronoun, was Fundamentalist Nightmare
Followup-To: alt.censorship,misc.writing
Organization: UIUC
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:59:33 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.182849.10775@thinkage.on.ca>, jim@thinkage.on.ca
(James Alan Gardner) wrote:
> 
> I've been a technical writer for 12 years, working for several
> companies over that time, and I've never found it necessary to
> use gender-exclusive language.  Some tips:
> 
> (a)  Use the second person.
> 
> (b)  Use plurals rather than singulars.

> (c)  Use simple designators.

> (d)  Use specific names with gender balance.


Seems to me that you get this week's good, practical advice award.
Thanks, Jim.  Hope you don't mind joining  Crawford and a
smattering of other famous net.folk  who are pinned to my  bulletin board.
I assure you,  I only use the highest quality stick-pins.

Maureen (aka Jane)
If you take hyphens seriously, you will surely go mad.
Xref: sparky alt.censorship:8577 misc.legal:19575 alt.politics.clinton:15844
From: s_titz@irau27.ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz)
Newsgroups: alt.censorship,misc.legal,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: [misc.legal, et al.] Censoring information , Is it possible tomorrow?
Summary: not only possible, but desirable! but no censorship
Date: 5 Nov 92 18:29:48 GMT
Organization: Fachschaft math/inf, Uni Karlsruhe, FRG
NNTP-Posting-Host: irau27.ira.uka.de

sorry, our news software is screwed up and I didn't manage to get it
working again until after the election ;-) but I had to say it:

> Would it be possible, and will it be constitutional to pass a law
> barring any network from disseminating information regarding the 
> polls until polling closes on the West coast. Could it be argued
> that the information regarding the polls affects national security
> (as it might influence the election of the president) and hence it
> should remain secret until polling closes all over the United states.
> Have such laws been proposed by anyone. I hear Perot has proposed
> something similar. 

Maybe that for me, living in a country that does not span across
multiple tiomezones, things are easier... but I have always wondered
why Americans accept the publication of vote results before all voting
offices are closed. I think it is *vital* for a ballot to work properly
that no results can leak out until the voting has ended. Would I live
in New York I would be upset about L.A. voters being influenced by the
already-published outcome of the (my:-) N.Y. vote!

I think that it would not only be legal (although I don't know the
American legal system too much, but it seems to be similar to ours in
some central points) but *desirable* to keep vote results secret until
all voting offices are closed. This could be accomplished without any
censorship or information-hiding simply by requiring that *all* vote
counting starts at the moment when *all* offices are closed, and the
ballot boxes are simply to be kept closed until that time.
Like in Germany :-) or other countries with only one time-zone...
Btw. there is that village in N.H. where the 30 or so voters cast
their votes just after midnight, to be the first place from which vote
results are reported... from my viewpoint this is rather absurd.

olaf

-- 
    o     Olaf Titz - comp.sc.student - univ of karlsruhe - germany
 _ /<_    s_titz@iravcl.ira.uka.de - uknf@dkauni2.bitnet - praetorius@irc
(_)>(_)   +49-721-60439 - did i forget something?
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
From: s0454850@let.rug.nl (J.P. Prenger)
Subject: Hitler's 'Mein Kampf'
Organization: Faculteit der Letteren, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, NL
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:01:39 GMT

Hi there!

I'm reading this newsgroup for about a week or so, and now I'm stuck with a 
question:

	'Where does censorship start & where does it stop?'

An example: as far as I know, the only book in Holland which is forbidden 
by the law is Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' (probably translated in English 
as 'My camp'  or something like that). There are people here, who think that 
you shouldn't do that. On the contrary, this book should be used 
in schools, to show how easy something can start & how terrible it can 
end (did it ever end? --> several anti-semitic & racial fights in Germany, 
Italy, a bomb in a mosk in Holland, etc.)

I'm curious how you people think about this: can you ban books? Especially a 
book like this? (D.A.F. de Sade's '120 days of Sodom' has just been re-
published in Holland. Okay, I know that this book didn't start a worldwar, 
but it isn't very humane too.) 


Jan Peter Prenger        || [message to all the cute people in the world:]
University of Groningen  || '-there's more of us ugly mother-fuckers than
The Netherlands          ||  you are - hey-y'   - - -  FRANK ZAPPA
From: meierdalepau@bvc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.censorship
Subject: Re:  [UPI] Library attacked for buying Madonna's book
Date: 13 Nov 92 18:13:45 CDT
Organization: Buena Vista College, Storm Lake, IA

	Good God!  And I thought it was bad when the Fundies started 
picketing libraries for carrying roleplaying games like D&D and AD&D.  
Granted, I'm no fan of Madonna either, but c'mon, just because you don't 
want your children to read a certain book doesn't mean you have to force 
your beliefs on the library and ruin others' [potential] enjoyment of it by 
enforcing a ban!  The members of Citizens against Pornography aren't the 
only people in the U.S. of A with civil rights guaranteed by the First 
Amendment.  As for the statement made about the 'morals' of the book by the 
president of the organization--it's the most absurd thing I've ever heard.  
A book in itself cannot have morals, it can, however, give the reader a 
view of the AUTHOR'S morals.  For a book to have morals is like saying a 
Christian bookstore can make decisions to either be for or against God and 
Christianity.  Recently we had a group here in Storm Lake trying to get 
artwork from the book "Animalia" banned from public display in the public 
library because of 'satanic symbols' and 'evil looking animals'.  Even more 
recent, the City Council in Des Moines tried to get Madonna's book banned 
from the D.M. public library but the motion was overturned after it was 
decided that the council had overstepped its bounds.

Dale Meier