----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Damon Agretto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: Fascist Censorship spreading like Cancer thruout Gov't


>
> I also heavily disagree with his assertation that
> Freedom of Speech defends one's right to use crude
> language or show inappropriate material where it may
> be exposed to minors. I think hiding behind this
> element of the Constitution is disgusting and
> demeaning to the purpose of that article.
>

On one hand I don't note any exceptions for crude language in the
amendment.

On the other I find repetitious use of such language to be either a
sign of stupidity or a sign of some psycho/social personality defect.

Beyond that, I find the "protection of the children" argument to be
quite weak.
1 Children use this kind of language already, because they hear it
from......other children. It's an everyday kind of thing that has very
little to do with what they hear adults do and say. A little
eavesdropping can be very educational.<G>

2 It is the parents responsibility to protect their children to the
degree that the parents require. It is a big big big mistake to
relinquish that responsibility to the government.
Each parent is responsible for what their children listen to and watch
in exactly the same way that parents are responsible for their
children's behavior.

3 (1) is as prominent as it is because it is *forbidden* and therefore
desirable. Once the desirability of forbidden things is eliminated it
goes away or generally becomes innocuous.
I'm fairly sure that if these rules were dropped and the market were
allowed to decide what wares to display, most of the shockjocks would
be out of a job in a year.


xponent
Reverse Psyche Maru
rob


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to