Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (5070)	9/23/1998 7:03:00 PM
From: dougjn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Ann -- I agree with all of that. Except the bit about banning all pornography. Because then you get down to who says this or that is pornography? Child pornography, sure. But would you ban Nabokov's Lolita, for example? Or if you wouldn't, are you sure that Barr or McCullum wouldn't? And on and on. I think that letting a thousand flowers bloom, except in horribly egregious cases (including explicit child porn), works pretty darn well. It seems to me that what degrades women is not allowing expression which takes advantage of a tendency among men to be aroused by the physical image of women. What degrades women is denying them the full rights and liberties which allow them to seize and exercise power. When a society is full of images of powerful and rising women, women tend to be enhanced. And not degraded. Overall. Even if there is some trash in the gutters. Doug

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (5070)	9/24/1998 9:34:00 AM
From: j_b	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

<< we're better off with the Repubs in control of congress(the purse strings) & in order to keep their radical right at bay, putting a democrat in the White House >> I agree. In California we tried the other way (Democrat Congress Republican Governor) and it doesn't work as well. Using a veto to stop a spending bill is guaranteed to gore someone's ox, and makes the person limiting the spending an easy target. The Democrats here love to spend money, and have been known to pass bills for the express purpose of having the governor veto them. That gives them the ability to say they voted for helping the children (or whatever) and that mean old Republican took the bread right out of their mouths. <<I believe there definitely should be obscenity laws of some sort for the internet. Since the internet is international, how would you enforce it? If you hold the ISP responsible, you are asking them to police the content of every single person using their service - a completely impossible task.