From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: [news.admin]  Re: "Computers graphic when it comes to porn"
Originator: daemon@eff.org
Organization: EFF mail-news gateway
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 05:31:58 GMT


From: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject:  Re: "Computers graphic when it comes to porn"
Date: 14 Aug 92 03:36:23 GMT

In article <920811.1523457463@foucault.postmodern.com> mcb@foucault.postmodern.com (Michael C. Berch) writes:
>In the referenced article, clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:
>> [With respect to alt.sex.bondage:]
>> The suggestion simply was: come on guys, do us a favour.  We'd like
>> to receive the main stuff, but the odd bit gives our government
>> indigestion.  How about a split?  Or a little gentle reminder from
>> time to time to get the odd posting redirected to somewhere more
>> appropriate.

>I've stayed out of this so far, but I don't think you understand how
>offensive I (and others) find the above paragraph.  I have absolutely
>no interest in any cooperation, no matter how slight, with any form of
>state censorship.  I believe that censorship is not merely evil but Evil, 
>and if your government gives you problems about that, I think you
>should oppose them.

For a person who is usually relatively well informed, this is a remarkably
*stupid* and insulting remark.

In case you missed it, Canada is not only a democracy, but these laws
enjoy the overwhelming support of the entire country.  State censorship?
Bullshit.  The state is us.  Evil?  You're calling the entire country evil.
At least Reagan had the sense to try to back out of his "evil empire"
remark, and his remark had a lot more validity than yours.

And why should I, or anybody else bust their butt to "save" crap like
this?  Crap who's only legacy is oppression, misery or even death [ie:
Keegstra or Zundel].

>I have no interest in giving even trivial respect
>to Canadian laws that restrict freedom of expression.

How about a little respect for the desires, laws and traditions of
other countries?

>I consider them
>an offense to human rights and urge you to oppose them, to struggle
>against them, to rise up and dismantle the institutions that
>implement them, by means of the ballot, by means of protest, civil
>disobedience, demonstration, samizdat, interference, and unblinking 
>opposition.

Why?  So a couple of morons get to jack off in from of their computer
terminals?  So that I have to *pay* for this shit?

>And to that end I believe that it is not only a right but a duty of
>Americans to make it as difficult as possible for Canadian (or any
>other state's) censors to do their job.

Oh great.  You gonna try to invade again?  Go "save" somebody else.
We're simply not interested in what you're selling.  We whupped you
last time you tried.

>If the Ontario Film Review
>Board's building was on fire, believe me, (other than to rescue
>trapped people), I would not put water on it.  

Shows what little you know.  The Ontario Film Review Board does not
censor movies.  Hasn't for a number of years.  It now only provides
ratings.  ["anne.jones" notwithstanding ;-)]

>So if censorship (and pressures to resist it, i.e., by cross-border sites
>that send you "illegal" material) gives you a problem, get on your
>MLA's case.  Don't come whining to Americans telling us to cool it; I
>think instead we should turn up the heat. 

So you have just gotta save us from ourselves.

Save us from evangelical Americans who simply cannot accept that there are
ways, *viable* ways, other than theirs.

It's attitudes like this that make the term "ugly american" so appropriate.

MLAs?  More ignorance.  MPs.

MLAs are the term for some provincial politicians.  This issue is federal.
-- 
Chris Lewis; clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca; Phone: Canada 613 832-0541
Psroff 3.0 info: psroff-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
Ferret list: ferret-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk