1996-02-14 - No Subject

Header Data

From: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
To: N/A
Message Hash: 078e1a3cd605ba4f9dad69e7c1f647c0d117859fc046b8b37b6c4f9d4f704118
Message ID: <QQacwx24457.199602141455@relay3.UU.NET>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-14 15:21:01 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 23:21:01 +0800

Raw message

From: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 23:21:01 +0800
Subject: No Subject
Message-ID: <QQacwx24457.199602141455@relay3.UU.NET>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


"Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+@CMU.EDU> said:

DBM> ObCrypto: Yes, Know Your Enemies and work with the natural
DBM> enemies of the religious right, such as groups like the ACLU and
DBM> the FEN. The theocratic push to outlaw nonescrowed crypto is
DBM> next.

	As someone who would prolly be considered part of the
'religious right' (why don't we ever hear of the 'religious left', who
are prolly just as much in support of banning porn?), I have to take
exception to this.  I'm appalled by the CDA, and, if you start
pointing out to religious supporters of the CDA that it has already
resulted in the King James version of the Bible being removed from (at
least) one web site, I'm sure that some of them will be as well,
especially the fundamentalists for whom the spread of the Gospel is,
well, gospel.  Be sure to point out that the same courts who the blame
for 'removing prayer from our schools' would be ruling on the indency
of the Bible.  As for supporting GAK/banning non-GAK, I don't think
that you would dispute that the 700 Club is strongly dominated by the
religious right, and it came out firmly AGAINST the entire notion of
GAK during the Clipper debate.

-- 
#include <disclaimer.h>                               /* Sten Drescher */
Unsolicited email advertisements will be proofread for a US$100/page fee.





Thread