> Well then, would it be inapropriate for me to ask > you to please > provide the definition of "Free" and "Speech" which > allows "freedom > of speech" to align with your doctrin?
My definition is freedom from persecution from the STATE for what one says. Specifically, I would define it as the freedom to criticize without fear of repercussions. I'm sure there are other ways you could define it, but I think definining it as the right to use obcenities without any regulation is just plain silly. > Also, why would a persons age, or rather why should > a persons age > have anthing to do with their possible exposure? It doesn't really, but its normally assumed that children should be protected from such things. As adults, its assumed that we have the werewithal and development that we can cope with such things effectively. I was using it as an example, since I think often the decency standards the FCC puts out is justified with the idea of protecting children from unacceptable material. Damon. ===== ------------------------------------------------------------ Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: ------------------------------------------------------------ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Get better spam protection with Yahoo! Mail. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
