1993-07-07 - Live for today

Header Data

From: fergp@sytex.com (Paul Ferguson)
To: tcmay@netcom.com
Message Hash: b817ba5ff43c72c1b5c4b579b45702a037b09c26b338d4d760039c629fc916fc
Message ID: <DFPa7B1w165w@sytex.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-07-07 04:13:49 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 6 Jul 93 21:13:49 PDT

Raw message

From: fergp@sytex.com (Paul Ferguson)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 93 21:13:49 PDT
To: tcmay@netcom.com
Subject: Live for today
Message-ID: <DFPa7B1w165w@sytex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Tue, 6 Jul 93 16:08:00 -0700,
 Timothy C. May <uunet!netcom.com!tcmay> wrote -
 
> The discussion of free speech and political correctness is
> apparently not welcome by some on this list. I guess the usual
> religious debates about which mail reader is better are what
> we're supposed to talk about. Well, I'm a member of this list,
> too, and issues of censorship and free speech are more
> interesting to me--and to some others, I suspect--than the
> intricacies of "MH."
 
 Hear, hear.
 
 Settle down, old chum. I suppose it takes a volitile issue or two to
 get me off of my keister, but now that I'm up, I'm more than willing
 to toss my (good?) name into the fracas.
 
 Idealisms are much akin to links in a chain; each crafted
 individually, yet forming a bond that link each idealism together
 into a society. (Discussions on how healthy this society really
 should be left for future discusion.)
 
 I walk a fine line between an affectionado for free speech and a
 staunch supporter of individual rights and privacy. Each aspect has
 its proponents and contentions, yet each aspect needs protection
 under _human_ law.
 
 Now, where does one infringe upon the other? I have always been fond
 of the adage that "your right to swing your fist ends when it hits my
 nose," and I hope you understand my sentiment. I have even played the
 role of the "net police" in at least one instance. (But then again, I
 did not react to rumor, innuendo or happenstance. This is another
 topic entirely. Those who subscribe to RISKS may be the wiser.)
 
 I applaud your exploit in the bitwise/erotica/net-police experiment.
 I personally think it was damned clever and proved a valuable point.
 In fact, I'd like to get your permission to reprint your original
 message in Legal Net News, por favor.
 
> What is happening to free speech? What has happened to "Sir, I
> disagree with what you say, but I defend to the death your right
> to say it."?
 
 I was a military-man (once upon a time), and took that oath
 seriously.  I tired of the "spinning-your-wheels" metality, so I
 naturally migrated into the private telecommunications sector.
 I would still defend it today, to death. Make no mistake, this
 country may have developed some serious problems over the course
 of the past 200 years, but some of us hold the intrinsic values
 embelished in the Constitution dear.
 
 What Tim has done is above and beyond petty in-fighting in this
 group. We are about change, challenge and chaos. We are old, we are
 new. We change, yet we are the same. What does it take?
 
 Ask us. We will tell you -- its about stirring up the pot.
 

Paul Ferguson               |  "Confidence is the feeling you get
Network Integrator          |   just before you fully understand
Centreville, Virginia USA   |   the problem."
fergp@sytex.com             |      - Murphy's 7th Law of Computing
 
               Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?





Thread