----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 5:47 PM Subject: Re: Sexually explicit materials, censorship, and strawmen.
> On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 05:43:24PM -0600, Michael Harney wrote: > > > By allowing sexual material on this list, you deny an underage person > > with prudish parents the right to join this list simply so perverts on > > list can publically exchange stroking material. > > Your logic continues to be seriously flawed. ALLOWING does not DENY. > They are basically opposites. Parents are certainly able to monitor what > their children do on the Internet and/or tell them what they may or may > not read. Your statement is ludicrous. By your logic, allowing someone the right to commit murder does not deny anyone their rights, including the victim, because, by your argument, the victim *chose* to be a victim, and living is just a convenience. The premise behind *equal* rights (not unlimited rights, equal rights) is that everyone has the same rights. Your rights end where my rights begin. You do not have the right to take property that is not yours. You do not have the right to asault another person. Why do you lack these rights? Because if you have those rights, and excercize them, it denies another of their rights. If someone cannot participate in the list (IE an underage listmember) because someone excercises their rights, then that right has deprived that person of their rights. > > Wrong, my argument is: I judge that a portion or (Y)'s rights has > > less value than the whole of (Z)'s rights. Therefore, is it ok to > > take a protion of (Y)'s rights away if that portion of (Y)'s rights > > takes away all of (Z)'s rights. > > Again, your logic is flawed. You are taking aways (Y)'s RIGHTS for (Z)'s > CONVENIENCE. This is a simple concept. RIGHTS do not equal CONVENIENCE. We are discussing rights as they pertain to this list, not society as a whole. You are using a flawed model where you compare Y's rights on the list to Z's rights in society as a whole. We are comparing Y's rights on the list to Z's rights on the list. And if Y has the right to post offensive material that Z is not allowed to see (by law or parents or sence of decency), then Y's actions are depriving Z of their rights on the list. In society as a whole, by denying Y the right to post obscene materials on-list, I am denying him nothing but that single right on the list. Y still has the right to post obscene material, just not on this list. Michael Harney [EMAIL PROTECTED] We do not inherit the Earth from our parents; we borrow it from our children. - Native American Phylosophy
