The reason I say this is misguided is that it distracts from debate
about the kinds of information that might ACTUALLY be dangerous.
Things like how to build and use guns and bombs and stuff. I'm
not saying I believe that the Anarchist's Cookbook should be banned
from the net, only that THAT's what we should be debating, not
naughty pictures or foul language. I know it's counter-intuitive that
pornography is harmless, but Denmark has proven it.
Besides that, WHAT does this have to do with SVS??? Sudbury
Vally School has to comply with the law of the land. It may not
be against the school's philosophy to censor, but the law says,
for example, that people under 18 shouldn't see pornography, (this
can vary from place to place), so an SVS-school will comply with
that. So in my opinion this issue doesn't have anything to do with
I apologize for the outburst but felt I had to say something.
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 1997 2:02 PM
Subject: Re: surfing uncesored
On Sat, 8 Mar 1997 Rockitone@aol.com wrote:
> as for censorship, i would say probably the most resistance would be from
> parents of the children. i know for a fact that some of the children could
> not handle the responsibility of the uncensored net, they would be drawn to
> the "bad" parts, and on the other hand there are alot of the kids who would
> surf just fine, who don't need to go to the "bad" places.
OK, so they'll go to the `bad' parts. So? Will they be zapped and
changed into toads or something? Everyone sees a bit of naughtiness now
and then, and almost everyone likes it, now and then.
Why don't parents grow up?
- Charles -