Censorship>
Zen master
...compressed...
Kaptain K Mart
...compressed...
indeterminate
...compressed...
B Man
...compressed...
B Man
...compressed...
Kaptain K Mart
...compressed...
JayDee
...compressed...
Zen master
...compressed...
Zen master
...compressed...
indeterminate
...compressed...
Mr. Bones
...compressed...
Covert User
...compressed...
JayDee
...compressed...
Spur
...compressed...
indeterminate
...compressed...
Mr. Bones
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
Twoflower
...compressed...
Zen master
...compressed...
Zippy
...compressed...
Cloister the Stupid
...compressed...
B Man
Probably.
Toastmaster General
I call
Mr. Bones
...compressed...
Mr. Psychologist
...compressed...
B Man
...compressed...
The Flying Dutchman
...compressed...
indeterminate
...compressed...
Zippy
...compressed...
Twoflower
...compressed...
JayDee
...compressed...
JayDee
...compressed...
JayDee
...compressed...
Mr. Psychologist
...compressed...
The Evil Prince
...compressed...
Twoflower
...compressed...
JayDee
honktoads...
Spur
...compressed...
JayDee
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
MoonPuppy
...compressed...
Mr. Bones
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Kaptain K Mart
...compressed...
Chris the Shaych
I add Spam.
deep fried frog
...compressed...
Twilight
...compressed...
Zippy
...compressed...
Kaptain K Mart
Exactly, Frog.
Twilight
...compressed...
Xiphiplastron
...compressed...
Spur
...compressed...
Kaptain K Mart
...compressed...
Flying Wombat
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
The Evil Prince
...compressed...
Twoflower
...compressed...
Twilight
...compressed...
MoonPuppy
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Xiphiplastron
...compressed...
MoonPuppy
...compressed...
indeterminate
...compressed...
Twoflower
...compressed...
The Evil Prince
...compressed...
Twilight
...compressed...
JayDee
...compressed...
Kaptain K Mart
...compressed...
Twoflower
...compressed...
B Man
KKM: It's a joke.
Raxxillion
net test
deep fried frog
...compressed...
Kaptain K Mart
...compressed...
The Microwarrior
...compressed...
B Man
...compressed...
B Man
...compressed...
Kaptain K Mart
...compressed...
NuTcAsE
...compressed...
Confederate Yankee
...compressed...
B Man
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
shane
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Geoff King
...compressed...
Natas
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Spur
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Ana Ng
...compressed...
shane
...compressed...
MoonPuppy
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Flying Wombat
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Spur
...compressed...
MoonPuppy
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Spur
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
MoonPuppy
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
shane
that sucks
Steve Baxter
what sucks?
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Spur
...compressed...
MoonPuppy
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
MoonPuppy
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Spur
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Twoflower
...compressed...
Ranger Rick
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Zippy
...compressed...
Ranger Rick
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
Santiago
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Logan
...compressed...
green
...compressed...
B Man
...compressed...
Santiago
...compressed...
Siddartha
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Cerphe
...compressed...
green
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Siddartha
...compressed...
Starshadow
...compressed...
Kaptain K Mart
...compressed...
VIOLENTPINKPHENOMENON
...compressed...
Good Catholic Father
...compressed...
bbr
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
B Man
...compressed...
Ariel
...compressed...
MotherEarth
...compressed...
Draft Card
green sucks
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
Ariel
...compressed...
Siddartha
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Zippy
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Steve Baxter
...compressed...
Ranger Rick
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Little Nemo
...compressed...
Cloister the Stupid
...compressed...
Hooded Menace
...compressed...
Flying Wombat
okay, in searching the latest news, I managed to find something that fits here..
Date: 24 Sep 1994 09:40:29 -0400
Source: The Washington Post.
Children, Adults and Pornography
CONGRESS HAS attempted twice in the past six years to deal with the problem of child pornography. In each case, the statute encroached on the First Amendment rights of adults. The first law was struck down by a federal court within a year. A revised version was also declared unconstitutional by a district court. But this week a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unwisely reversed and upheld the current version of the law.
The government is justified in seeking to combat the abuse of children by pornographers who photograph or film youngsters engaged in explicit sexual acts. There is neither a moral nor a constitutional argument about that. At the same time, though, the government cannot regulate adult conduct that is not defined as obscenity. Films and photographs of the kind under discussion are, by and large, protected by the First Amendment, and government regulation that severely burdens their creation is unconstitutional.
The statute at issue is designed to facilitate prosecution of child-abusing pornographers by requiring extensive record-keeping by those involved in the production and distribution of sexually explicit material. They must create, store and make available, for example, files listing every individual appearing in such a film or photograph, including the subject's age and a copy of the documentary evidence produced to verify his age, and every name he has ever used. The records must be kept for five years, and a notice must be affixed to the materials stating where the records can be located. Anyone who does not create these images but "produces, assembles, manufactures, publishes, duplicates, reproduces or reissues" them must also keep copies of these same records. Because it is difficult, the government argues, to discern the age of any model in a sexually explicit image - some teenagers may appear to be 20 when they are really 15 - the law applies to every such photograph or film, though the appeals court hinted that images of subjects who are obviously senior citizens might be exempt.
This distinction highlights the basic flaw in the law. The government should stop imposing burdens on the production of material that does not involve children in any way. Among the organizations challenging these sweeping restrictions are the American Library Association and the American Booksellers Association, which believe they will have a severe impact on constitutionally protected activity. We think they're right. 02:12 09-24C9999-----
Torso
Water buffalo felch.
JayDee
maybe you were being a dick, dick...
Saint Bob
Freejack - I've got Fred execs in my cit download room.
doctor doom
yummy.
night train
Mister, I don't know what you're talking about.
Saint Bob
HONK if you can read this!
Pyromania
You got that impression just from that single inane message? Wow... ;}
Flying Wombat
Date: 3 Oct 1994 05:33:24 -0400
Some On-Line Guidelines Are Out of Line With Free Speech Rights
By John Schwartz, Washington Post Staff Writer
There are some cases you just hate to see settled out of court. No, I'm not talking about the Michael Jackson molestation suit. I mean the astonishing case out of a Northern California junior college that pits on-line free speech rights against sexual harassment complaints. To many in the on-line world, the outcome looks like a chilling rout for the First Amendment.
In this battle of civil liberties versus civil rights, on-line campus discussion groups were shut down by a school official. Then the U.S. Department of Education's regional office of civil rights stepped in and proposed guidelines that could hold institutions governed by federal sex discrimination rules responsible for what people say in their electronic town halls. This effectively outlaws unkind words on-line. In the
meantime, three students who filed discrimination and harassment complaints against the school with the civil rights office walked away with some money. Lois Arata, Jennifer Branham and Dylan Humphrey accepted $15,000 apiece to drop their claims.
Some background: Since 1992, Santa Rosa Junior College has sponsored about 200 on-line discussion groups in a bulletin board system that allows people to read and post messages electronically on a broad range of topics.
There was a women-only conference. There was also one for men only. It was intended as a sort of on-line speak-easy, a place where men could talk about gender issues and the like without worrying about giving offense.
Now, some of the 10 men who signed up for the conference used their clubhouse to become very offensive indeed, making puerile, nasty comments about Arata and Branham. Arata drew their ire for leading a boycott of the school newspaper over a cheesecakey ad. Branham was involved in an breakup with a member of the men-only conference.
Humphrey, a member of the men's conference, told the women about the electronic insults. (He said later in his complaint that the school retaliated against him for allegedly violating the confidentiality of the on-line bull sessions.)
Roger Karraker, the Santa Rosa journalism professor who organized the on-line system and had set up the gender-specific conferences by student request, shut them down within minutes of hearing about the complaint. Karraker then spent months out of the classroom on forced "administrative leave" as the Education Department's civil rights office conducted an inquiry.
In an electronic mail interview, Karraker said that the investigation was one-sided: The office "accepted the claimant's versions of the content of on-line postings. Witnesses weren't asked about them, their veracity or completeness. Witnesses aren't allowed to know - and refute - others' statements." Last month the civil rights people sided with the three students who filed the complaint and said that the conferences should
be treated like a "limited public forum," not an anything-goes soapbox - a contention that on-line civil liberties activists hotly dispute.
The office drew up a "proposed remedial action plan" that essentially calls for the school to outlaw mean talk on-line. This would include any speech "that satisfies both the following conditions (1) harasses, denigrates, or shows hostility or aversion toward an individual or group based on that person's gender, race, color, national origin or disability AND (2) has the purpose or effect of creating a hostile, intimidating or offensive educational environment."
With no discernible irony, the civil rights office also wrote that "nothing contained herein shall be construed as violating any person's rights of expression set forth in the Equal Access Act or the First Amendment of the United States Constitution."
Cynthia Dyer-Bennett, editor of the Santa Rosa student newspaper, says most media accounts have lost sight of the story by slighting the details. In postings on the WELL, an on-line service based in Sausalito, Calif., Dyer-Bennett contended that the Santa Rosa tempest had more to do with personal agendas than grand constitutional issues. She notes that Branham had been making demeaning comments about her former
boyfriend in public conferences before he vented about her in the private conference. She said also that Humphrey had been removed from an editorial position at the paper, for which Karraker is faculty adviser, and had "expressed to several students his desire to 'get Karraker.'"
Branham doesn't deny she said rude things about the former boyfriend, but contends these were "not the instigator" of his comments. She said the three took on the school instead of simply suing the individuals for defamation because "we thought we could make the most change for the better that way. A civil suit against the boys would just give us some pocket money." Branham is distressed, she said, that so many people "are taking this case like it's some kind of gag on society."
For his part, Humphrey said he did not say he wanted to "get Karraker." But he conceded that "I never gave much respect to the man."
Though our three complainants are now out of the picture, the college still has to reach some kind of accommodation with the civil rights office. The college's lawyer, Bob Henry, has said that the college might take the case to court to make a stand for free speech. "Suffice it to say that the process was the most Kafka-esque, un-American thing I've ever experienced," Karraker said. The Education Department people are a 'civil rights' office that
tramples civil rights in pursuit of a political agenda."
Until we really think through the role of on-line media in our constitutional framework, this is our fate: to stumble through a legal hall of mirrors, with no exit in sight.
John Schwartz's e-mail address is schwartj@twp.com.
Little Nemo
Jesus. Do they carry Usenet at that school? I suppose not...
Mina
Honk, honk.
West
Honk!
West
Gee whiz, Flying Wombat, I dunno. Maybe colleges shouldn't be spending public money to do things which invite law suits.
Personally, my view of public institutions of higher learning is that they have a purpose, which is to educate people so that those people can go out and perform highly skilled jobs. Why we should spend money so that people who know nothing about that of which they speak can say outrageous things for purely private reasons is beyond me.
If there were some really educational purpose, aside from maybe learning how to apply nasty invective involved here, I would stand firmly on the side of free speech and let those who don't like it hang up the modem, in this case I kind of lean towards hoping that the Santa Rosa community and California in general will decide to spend that money on teaching people how to design and sell and manufacture better modems for less money than on personal squabbles.
John Shannon
Colleges should do more than simply "educate people so that those people can go out and perform highly skilled jobs" because there is more to the world than work. There is also life, and the love of our culture, history, and world. We don't live in Germany, and our singular purpose isn't work, work, work (little jab at the Krauts there). For many, enjoying life is a higher priority.
(Actually, the German idea about the work-life thing is even worse here in America. I just saw it most in Germany than any other European nation. But I think the idea is based in Bellevue, Washington, and eminates from there.)
Freejack
oh oh... torso may make others upset again... he said that most dread of evil "b" words... buffalo... oops, now i've gone and said it...
West
Oh, well, John, all colleges and universities require students to get what is called a "well rounded education," which includes courses in social studies, arts, sciences, English and so forth. That's not what I'm talking about.
Those things give context to the main core of courses for the major, and that's just fine.
But here we have something which I think is quite different. This is a BBS. There is no teaching going on, no director and quite obviously no direction, no particular point, no target, no way to know if one is progressing, regressing or staying put. As an educational tool, it seems to me to be pretty empty.
Now, what I said was that the purpose of institutions of higher learning is to teach people how to go out and do highly skilled jobs. Surely any job may be aided by courses in general knowledge, because as I mentioned above, that provides the context and the links between one's specialty and the rest of the world.
I just don't see how an undisciplined shouting match can possibly be helpful in that respect, and I don't see what is the difference between that and using a private BBS or for that matter, going out to the nearest public park, climbing up on a soap-box, mouthing off and inviting abuse from all comers.
Torch Song
honk?
Megamol
Some people just aren't bright enough to realize that they can just push n or shut off the computer if they don't like what's being said (no I wasn't refering to either of the above messages, I was refering to the mess at the college). When someone is in the park they do feel that they can walk away. Not saying this is right, but it does seem to work that way.
Montesquieu Miller
honk.
siggy
don't you mean redmond?
John
"... all colleges and universities require students to get what is called a 'well rounded education,' which includes courses in social studies, arts, sciences, English and so forth."
Mine didn't. Do what you want for four years, and then get a degree. There was no requirement that you cover any of those topics you mentioned.
West
John, you mean to tell me that you went to a college or university not a trade school for four years and you had absoluely no required courses outside of your major? I went to school in California, and every college and university there is required by law to demand that graduating students have had a certain number of credits in the arts, humanities, sciences, English, mathematics and so forth. Within each group you had some choice of what to take. For example, I could have taken sociology or anthropology, but I had to take one of them, and I had to take either music or art, and so forth. I didn't realize that there were any states that didn't require, for an undergraduate degree, about half in the major and the other half outside the major.
John
No, West, not a single course was actually required for my 4-year degree.
Blade Runner
West> I'm accustomed to the same credit distribution as you are describing. I would have loved to pick and choose all my courses...
Little Nemo
West: John is talking about the Evergreen State College in Olympia. And he is right; there are no requirements there. But that doesn't mean you can necessarily get away with slacking...
Grendel
That's not what I hear, Little Nemo.
Little Nemo
You have to work to get away with slacking. It can be done, but it can be a major pain in the butt setting up an independent contract that allows you to slack.
Megamol
"Everything is wrong that forbids the freedom of the individual"..Dylan Thomas.
Flying Wombat
West: I just post these articles, as they relate to the topic of censorship. at the moment, I'm doing so without adding my own editorial opinions, though I could change that if I find it appropriate.
anyhow, here's the next article that came my way...
Flying Wombat
Date: 10 Oct 1994 03:45:01 -0400
Conservatives Press Limits in Libraries
Activists Gaining Ground Despite Setback in Fairfax
By Robert O'Harrow Jr. and Debbi Wilgoren, Washington Post Staff Writers
They are facing defeat in Fairfax in their effort to restrict children from library materials on such topics as homosexuality and suicide, but Christian activists and other conservatives have no intention of backing off there or in other Washington area suburbs.
Their loosely organized movement already is pushing similar proposals, with some success. In Montgomery County, officials are considering optional library cards to limit youngsters' video choices to the children's section. In Loudoun County, which soon will allow parents to see their children's borrowing records, the Library Board chairman wants some books placed off-limits to minors who don't have permission to read materials with mature themes.
And in Fairfax County, Library Board member Ronald J. Savage still intends to push warning labels or new display policies for adult-oriented books, videos and publications. He also plans to propose a review of library purchasing procedures to counter what he says is the influence of homosexuals.
Although the issue of what should be offered on library shelves - and who should get to see it - has roiled Fairfax for two years, the biggest protest came after a recent proposal to create an adults-only section for materials on certain controversial topics.
For some conservative parents and policy-makers, the issue is not censorship but how to help ever-busier parents oversee their children's choices.
"I'm not much of a book burner. I never remember being in favor of censorship," said David N. Olson (At Large), a Loudoun School Board member and local Republican activist. "But I do feel that you don't want to have public institutions like the library feeding kids material that is inappropriate for their age level."
Olson said he is uncomfortable with the idea of setting aside certain materials only for adults, saying that might restrict classics such as "Catcher in the Rye" simply because they contain racy language or imagery.
At the same time, he said he is concerned about "the homosexual agenda," which he defines as a push to include books about gay people in reading lists for all ages. He said he would support restricting preteens to a children's room unless they are accompanied by a parent.
"I'm just not willing to let my 6-year-old become a social experiment," Olson said. "You can accept what (homosexuals) do, but I'm not sure it's the agenda that should be preached to teenagers and younger" children.
Christian activist Karen Jo Gounaud, who has led the recent effort in Fairfax, has tried to capitalize on such feelings. At a Fairfax supervisors' meeting last month, Gounaud opened a book on homosexuals' struggle for civil rights to show pictures of men having sex and of naked men and women.
Such tactics have become more common among conservative activists across the nation, said Mike Klein, a spokesman for the National Jewish Democratic Council, which, among other things, monitors conservative political groups.
"You're dealing here with some fairly pervasive homophobia," Klein said. "It's one of their ways of reaching into mainstream America. ... They're definitely reaching beyond the hard core of the radical right."
Those on the other side of the issue see it differently.
"This whole legitimization (of homosexuals) is actually creating a backlash," said Kelly Mullins, a spokeswoman for an anti-homosexual group called the Traditional Values Coalition. "It has turned a lot of Joe and Jane Americans into activists."
A year ago, Tom Carnahan - a 45-year-old computer analyst - was opposed to any limits on library access. Carnahan, a self- described libertarian who lives with his wife and two sons in a neighborhood near George Mason University, still says he is "very much concerned" with government intrusion into family matters.
Yet Carnahan is now part of Gounaud's crusade and has testified before both the Fairfax Library Board and county supervisors in support of efforts to restrict access. He said he was converted after calling Gounaud last spring to ask just what she was trying to do.
"She gave me some titles, and I started looking up some of them," Carnahan said. The list included sexually explicit books and a detailed, graphic chronology of some of America's most heinous crimes.
"If I had tried to check out one of (these books) when I was a kid," he said, "the librarian would have said, `Young man, do your parents know you are checking that book out?' They don't do that anymore."
Carnahan said the proposed policy, which could come to a vote at a Library Board meeting Wednesday, is not censorship because parents could sign permission slips allowing their children in the adults-only section.
"Where's the safety net?" he asked. "Where's the friendly government intervention in the form of the library helping the parents out?"
Opponents said that only a small but vocal minority is pushing such measures and that they ultimately will fail. They cite what happened last month in Fairfax, where officials from the PTA to the County Board of Supervisors condemned Gounaud's effort. A majority of Library Board members have said they will vote no.
"A number of groups have stood up together and said enough is enough. We're not going to tolerate censorship, and we're not going to tolerate what is basically a message of hate," said Stephanie Burns, president of the Fairfax Lesbian and Gay Citizens Association.
The Fairfax Library Board chairman, Herbert A. Doyle Jr., said he was saddened to see Gounaud and others use homosexuality as a "wedge issue" to, in his view, divide people and gain control.
"Obviously, it's a hot button," he said.
The debate also has surfaced in Montgomery, where efforts to boost supervision over what young people borrow from libraries followed some parents' complaints about the availability of the book "The New Joy of Gay Sex."
Montgomery library officials said sequestering explicit books would violate their commitment to a free flow of information. Instead, they proposed allowing parents to see their children's borrowing records or to forbid their youngsters to take videos from the main collection.
County attorneys are reviewing both options, which a parent would have to request. Since the 1970s, Montgomery libraries have offered young readers both regular and children's cards; the latter restricts them to the children's room unless accompanied by an adult.
"We're looking for ways to allow parents to make their own decisions about what their children see - instead of letting the library choose," said Kay Ecelbarger, chief of Montgomery's collection development. "We don't want to get into the business of labeling books with our approval or disapproval of what's in them."
Loudoun Library Board Chairman Dennis Pierce, an accountant whose three children range in age from 2 to 10, doesn't see why not.
Pierce and Gounaud began talking during his fight to make R- rated library movies off-limits to minors - which he won last month. He said her ideas "have a lot of merit."
This winter, Pierce plans to ask his board to require parental permission for children who want to borrow books with explicit language, sexual imagery or violence.
"I think it's very reasonable to say that there are certain things in this world that should be off-limits to children," he said.
"Faulkner, although he's a great author, does use profanity. And while I would want my son to read him, I'd rather he do it when he was 18 than when he was 8."
Flying Wombat
okay, so I'll comment on it this time. it seems that certain parents want to control what their children can access, but by being busier with their own activities, aren't about to take personal responsibility for it. instead, they want government, or in particular the public library systems within their influence, to do their job for them.
Megamol
Back when they were first talking about making certain records available to over 18 only I saw a discussion panel on T.V. with Frank Zappa on it. He really managed to alienate a couple of yuppie broads by saying that it was the parents responsibility, not the record industrys, to pay attention to what their children was listening to, and then to take steps to correct anything unsuitable. One lady said that they didn't have time to be bothered listening to the type of music that her child listened to, upon which Frank told her that she was failing willfully to understand his point, and then asked her whether or not she had been too busy to listening to what he had just said. If looks could kill......Personally, when I was a child I can remember my mother telling the librarian that it was ok for me to check out whatever books I wanted to including the adult books (back then they needed parental permission to let you check out adult books if you were under 12 or so) because she figured that if I already knew about something it wouldn't hurt me and if I didn't, well I either just wouldn't understand or I'd ask her and she could decide whether or not to explain...but then again it was a simpler world 25 years ago....
JayDee
my family had a rather large technical library, covering just about any
subject from aircraft engineering to zoology...and I had unlimited access
I didn't like the law books...they were lame
the only one I got into was a 1768 edition of "Every Man his own Lawyer"
by the time I got to first grade, Dick and Jane was being rather redundant...
at no time in my childhood was I ever not given permission to read
I find the whole concept of not allowing people to read anything they
want to be totally repressive and disgusting
next it will be the Thought Police...
Bookworm
Megamol- It was a simpler world not that long ago even.
Twoflower
I'd certainly find it difficult to get away with slacking in my current course here at Evergreen; others I talk to in other courses say the same thing.
The only real way I can think of to really slack here is to find a sympathetic instructor to sponsor an independent contract and get lucky enough that nobody really notices that you're slacking.
And for a BA no particular distribution is required; simply the correct number of credits. A BS does require 72 credits in science, 48 being upper division. And there are no expressed "majors," but since the programs are mostly all-inclusive, it's hard to take much else when you're trying for 3 years of computer science. :)
A recent survey by US News and World Report listed Evergreen as the top small liberal arts college in the West, being the only public school in the top 10 in that catagory. Also, a study showed that more Evergreen graduates go on to become physicians per capita than any other school in the nation. ANY OTHER.
Talks with recruiters for graduate programs at schools like the UW and Western Washington University have produced the statement they'd take an Evergreen graduate over anybody from any other school in the country, because Evergreen graduates already know how to study on their own and do graduate work.
Of course, 25% of incoming freshmen drop out by the end of their first year, but that just goes to show that self-motivation and independent thinking aren't for everyone.
Spur
lets hold on for a minute. who says the purpose of higher education is to teach professional skills? i think if you read the mission statements of some colleges/universities (those that have mission statements) you would find that skills for jobs is not the highest priority given.
i understand your reluctance for public money being spent for such purposes, but i think youll find that there is public money spent for quite a few things at schools that are not necessary for educational purposes. lets try carpets as an example. or how about athletic programs.
colleges do things that have to do with student interests. and i certainly dont blame them for it. it attracts people to college, people who might not otherwise go (which might not always be a good thing). if you complain about the money being spent on the bbs, why arent you complaining about the money maintaining the landscaping of the campus? ill bet you the landscaping is more costly.
there was something else you said that kinda caught me wrong, and it took me a second to realize what seemed wrong with it to me. you said something to the effect that colleges shouldnt be doing things that invite lawsuits.
now, if you had said colleges shouldnt be doing things that are illegal, that wouldve been different. but, of course, they werent doing anything illegal. but there is an awful lot of room for things to "invite lawsuits". should education concern itself with the idea that somebody MIGHT get pissed and that the establishment MIGHT lose money? think of a lot of the research thats been done at colleges. would any of it have been done if schools refused to do anything that MIGHT get them sued?
Merky
You know what the nice thing about freedom is, it is tuner knobs, channel changers, and enter keys. If you don't like it, don't read, watch, or listen to it. But leave me the fuck alone and let me do what I want with it.
Freejack
yeppers.
NightStalker
About that girl going to sue the school that got paid $15000 as well as two other people, that is a bunch of crap. Justice in this country is entirely screwed up to give 3 people that much money for getting their feelings hurt. Oh no, I feel so sorry for them, they have such dreadful problems. Please, there are much more constructive things to do with time/and money to bring up charges like that. That just makes me mad.
JayDee
gha
moms change, sometimes NOT for the better
I have gotten to see four generations of moms doing their thing...bazz!
and all in a rather condensed timeframe, as well...most enlightening...
Oongouwh Gautauma
FYI folks!
Yesterday afternoon there was a massive (40.000) protest march and rally against the legislation of the Criminal Justice Bill which is scheduled to go through in the next few weeks. This Bill will make it illegal for gatherings
of over 10 people on public land, and will allow squatters to be evicted within 24 hours, both serious threats to civil liberties in the UK. As well, the right to silence will be removed -- obscene in a Bill created originally to reduce
wrongful convictions.
So the thousands of people marched through the streets of London, accompanied by the sound systems which promote and support the rave culture in Britain. At around 5pm, when everyone was raving away in Hyde Park, the police
started rushing the park on horseback, trying to shut down the rave, whose permit was to end at 4:30. My feeling is that if the police had laid low, the rave would have continued til people got hungry and the pubs opened and folks would
have left. But rave music is political here, symbolic in the same way that punk once was. The police were determined to shut it down.
But things did not go as planned. When the police charged, the crowds of 4-5000 moved towards them and after hailing bottles and sticks at them, the mounted police moved outside the gates. Along the gates were hundreds of cops in
riot gear. Repeatedly they charged the fence, behind which massed hundreds of masked protesters. While missiles were few, folks went on forays into the city and returned bearing paving stones and sticks. When the police charged and tried
to batter across the fence, there was a strong hail of bags of sand, bottles and sticks, so they quickly withdrew.
Still, the mood was festive, a bicycle powered sound system repeatedly circled and fire eaters and jugglers performed, poets ranted through megaphones and the crowd danced to hardcore techno. When space was reclaimed, it just
became part of the dance floor, making the cops assaults increasingly ludicrious. At around 10 pm, Word circulated that all the gates had closed and we were all hungry tired and it felt like a good time to leave. Yet, when we headed for
the exits, all the streets were lined with cops in riot gear and the Underground/Metro was closed. Quickly, people broke through the lines across Oxford St. and suddenly store windows were shattering and everyone was running -- fast.
53 Shops had their windows smashed including the Boots and McDonalds, both companies under boycott. When Tottenham Court Road Station was reached, many broke through the lines and entered the transport to go home.
The BBC reported that police are looking for a group of anarchist organizers
for the riot. Personally I think that it was largely spontaneous, a situation created by the cops, with a crowd sick and tired of being harassed; this week the longstanding road protest in Leytonstone, London will probably end after
a slow destruction of homes and communities.
The cracks in the system are increasingly evident, and the political is becoming redefined.
John
Now they've gotten Twoflower. But we're going to try and stop them at the delta.
Grendel
I'll bring the ammo, John. We can still stop them.
john hinkley
its easy to be self-motivated if you need to be motivated about
something which you care about. if its crap, if its pawns, meanin-
gless stuff its very difficult.
for me
Flying Wombat
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 94 21:20:06 PDT
Subject: NJ Community Bans Profanity
RARITAN, N.J. (AP) -- Watch your tongue in Raritan.
The Borough Council approved an amendment Tuesday that bans cursing in public in the quiet town about 30 miles west of New York City.
The measure passed 5-0, with one abstention.
Mayor Anthony DeCicco had said last week that most of the borough's 5,800 residents, many of whom are senior citizens, supported the ban.
But Police Chief Joseph Sferra opposes it, saying his department won't arrest people for behavior which, in his opinion, has been upheld by the courts. To enforce such a law would be inviting a lawsuit, he said.
"That's his decision as of now," DeCicco said Tuesday. "Until it becomes law, he can say whatever he likes."
The amendment becomes law once it is advertised in a local paper where residents can see it, which should take only a few days.
DeCicco said there have been no incidents of rude behavior in the 2-square-mile borough but he wanted the ban as a "protective measure" to protect the quality of life.
The amendment would make it illegal for people to behave in a disorderly manner by using "noisy, rude or indecent behavior, by using profane, vulgar or indecent language, by making insulting remarks or comments to others" on public streets or places.
The ban carries a possible penalty of a $500 fine, a 90-day jail term or both.
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 94 17:50:33 PDT
Subject: NJ Town Bans Foul Mouths
RARITAN, N.J. (AP) -- A car with Florida plates pulled slowly onto Raritan's main thoroughfare Wednesday. An elderly couple looked around curiously.
"Is this the town that just banned cursing?" Harry Stiles, 75, asked a passerby. When the Tampa resident was told yes, Stiles replied, "Oh good. Because we want to move here."
Stiles isn't the only person who likes the cursing ban the borough council passed unanimously Tuesday night. A Montville man is offering $10,000 to any state or federal legislator who can make cursing in public a crime.
"I'm not saying I want a cop on every street corner with a bar of soap in his pocket to wash your mouth out with soap," Brad Honigsberg said of his offer. "But I do think cursing in public should be banned. People can't seem to do it voluntarily, so it's up to lawmakers."
Other residents and visitors interviewed Wednesday in this 2-square-mile borough of 5,800 residents, many senior citizens, oppose the ban, saying it infringes on free speech.
Bree Dougherty, 21, said she couldn't believe the council passed it.
"What are they thinking?" said Dougherty, who recently moved here from Philadelphia. "The days of 'Leave It to Beaver' and 'American Bandstand' are long gone. The council should be more worried about how to protect citizens from crime and how to keep property taxes low."
A similar law in Quincy, Mass., hasn't ever led to a prosecution, Mayor James A. Sheets said. Just the threat has helped police keep language in check since the city revamped its loitering ordinance in 1991 to bar public cursing.
The Raritan cursing ban makes it illegal for people to behave in a disorderly manner by using "noisy, rude or indecent behavior, by using profane, vulgar or indecent language, by making insulting remarks or comments to others" in public.
Violators will be issued a summons, and could get as much as a $500 fine and 90 days in jail.
The American Civil Liberties Union's New Jersey chapter has deemed the ban unconstitutional. Ed Martone, the chapter's executive director, said the organization would not take action unless police enforce the ban.
And Raritan Police Chief Joseph Sferra has said that doing so would only invite a lawsuit.
Martone has said the ACLU will probalby step in and help if someone wants to challenge the ban.
That didn't scare Mayor Anthony DeCicco from going ahead with Tuesday night's vote, and it isn't scaring the ban's supporters.
Honigsberg, president of Air Contact Transport Inc., an overnight delivery company, made the same $10,000 offer in 1988 -- after being angered in a Point Pleasant Beach restaurant when a group of men were cursing loudly, bothering not only him, but an elderly couple nearby.
"When the elderly man asked them to stop cursing, one of the men said, 'Sit down, you bleeping old man,' " Honigsberg recalled. "So then I stood up and told them to stop."
The men took one look at Honigsberg, a 45-year-old with the build of a football player, and decided to knock it off, Honigsberg laughed.
"Foul language is like a symptom," he said. "It's a defiance of accepted social mores and decorum and authority."
Honigsberg even has a loosely organized group called The Great American Smut-Out. The group's big event comes in May, when it encourages Americans to stop swearing for a week.
West
WhoTo whom do I write? I object to this name, "The Great American Smut-Out."
It contains that four letter word meaning 'dirty words' which is in itself a dirty word. The title is an obvious appeal to the gutter intellects of Honigsberg's elderly but still actively obscene generatgeneration. I want the use of such words stopped now, and I want the sanction to be at the very least five years in the state penitentiary.
This is important for America. If people are allowed to go around saying the word "sm-t" with no penalty, the very fabric of freedom and liberty will dissolve like sugar in shit, and I just won't stand for it!
Megamol
ok, so while we're at it lets eliminate all 4 letter words, and why not all 3,2,1,and 5 letter words....hell, lets eliminate words and speech altogether and THEN what will people do for excitement????? (Stupid question I know...)
Megamol
sorry folks...I didn't mean to create a monster....
West
Hey Megamol that, (why not eliminate all speech) isn't a stupid question at all. I think we should. If we eliminate all speech, all writings, all gestures, all of the arts, in short, all utterances, why then, no one will be offended.
To ensure this, we really ought to separate all people so that we won't be taking a chance that one person might somehow offend another.
Ideas are dangerous! But in order to really make sure, in order to know that no two people will jump the fence, get together and cheat by talking, we really must eliminate the fundamental source of this horrible an unacceptable problem of people annoying each other.
Remember, words don't annoy people, *people* annoy people.
The solution to having annoying thoughts in our brains is to eliminate the brains, and of course the casing and support system for the brain, the rest of the body.
I think the easy, simple and straighforward solution to all of our problems is to kill everyone.
Then we won't be here to have problems of any kind. No crime, think of it! No worries about pornography, about racial or othe insults, no worry at all.
I believe that although the bill will be high, it's worth it, especially in view of the fact that no one will be left who has to pay it...
West
Well, it's too late to be sorry now. You created it, and it won't be censored.
Megamol
@@##$$?????
Freejack
i wonder if the last person out will turn off the lights?
Megamol
nah, why bother to turn out the lights??? It's already pretty dark in here...
Merky
Welcome to the beginning of newspeak...
anyone else getting a 1984 flashback?
FRuG
Ah, you see...... everything so far is *CENSORED*.
Prick
"newspeak" or something like it will happen, and it will start with us.
this information superfuckway is going to change language as we know it.
as people begin to talk more on these than they do in real life, and that will happen, we're going to eliminate a whole bunch of useless words.
and have new shortened words, etc. it will be neeet
john hinkley
it will be bullshit because the informatino superhighway
is a synonym for CENTRALIZED INFORMATION which is the
downfall of western civilization since western civilizationm
is based on information as opposed to spirituality.
Prick
fuck we'll never see shit
Freejack
that is an interesting way to look at it Prick...
though i don't see it that way...
Freejack
it is pretty dark isn't it?
my kids school sent home a note today letting the parents know that
Halloween wasn't in the school's curriculum and that the students
aren't to wear costumes that day... instead they would hold a harvest
celebration... this bothers both of my children... who at 6 and 9 years
of age seem to have realized what censorship is and how it can affect
them and others... and when they asked if they could still wear
their costumes i told them no... even though i scream on the inside
to let them... i think i'll have a talk with them tommorrow about it.
Spur
oh god, they cant wear cosutmes to school, the poor things are so fucking censored.
Prick
huh
Censorship> _