From: Alan Olsen <alano@teleport.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 17:13:43 +0800
To: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
Subject: Re: Schlafly on crypto
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960815053035.00fc9d90@mail.teleport.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 05:47 PM 8/14/96 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>                          SANDY SANDFORT
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>
>C'punks,
>
>On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, Alan Olsen wrote:
>
>> Well, I can think of a few reasons to come to that conclusion.  
>> 
>> - Schlafly is the head of one of the more right-wing
>> organizations in the country.  
> 
>Some right-wingers don't like free speech, most do.  This 
>characterization is not enlightening on the question at hand.

Actually, i have found that it does not matter which side you choose, right
or left, they desire free speech for themselves and not for others.

>> - She is very closly associated with the Buchanon campaign and
>> the Christian coalition.  
>
>Does Buchanan favor censorship of the Net?  If so, what leads you
>to believe Schlafly shares that particular view?  This guilt by
>(assumed) association is not fair nor persuasive.

I am not certain about Buchanan, but i do know that the Christian coalition
is very much in favor of net censorship.  Actually, I can find no statements
in either direction on the Eagle Forum web site. 

Do you know of any statements by Schlafly and/or the Eagle forum either for
or against net censorship?  I know of none for, and the circumstantial
evidence available does not reinforce the conclusion that she is against it.

>> - Her organization, the Eagle Forum, distributes a couple of
>> anti-porn rant tracts (http://www.eagleforum.org/users/eagle/
>> public_html/misc/order.html) called _Pornography's Victims
>> $4.95 (paperback) by Schlafly, ed._ 
>
>Being against porn does not mean one is pro-censorship.  (I don't
>like smoking, but I don't think it should be illegal.)  We need
>something more concrete to support such an accusation.

I have yet to see anyone who publishes anti-porn screeds based off of the
Bundy case that does not support censorship of such materials.  Can you
point me to any?  Or any material that would lend credence to the argument
that she supports freedom for anyone except "Good God-Fearing Christians"?

>> I know that he [Phyllis' son] is gay.  His mother seems to have
>> had some problems coming to terms with the implications of alot
>> of her rhetoric involving such things...
>
>Really?  I though she very clearly has stated that she hates the
>sin, not the sinner.  What evidence does Alan have that she has
>had "some problems coming to terms..."?

Lon Mabon also claims to "hate the sin and love the sinner".  It does not
prevent him from dredging up as much hate as possible for those who are gay.
Actually my beliefs are based opon statements she made at the time.  You may
have more information on the subject than I do...  

>> (She seems to confuse her religion with reality on this point.)
>
>As does Alan.

Without evidence to back up your claims, I cannot make any judgement than
what I have made.  Her associations with people who believe in censorship
and her devotion to a branch of Christianity that supports censorship, as
well as her sales of publications used to justify censorship makes me
believe that she follows that course.  Without specific examples that show
that she does not believe in such measures, I have no reason to assume any
other conclusion.
 
>> I would say there are alot of reasons to assume that Schlafly
>> would try and impose her morality on the rest of the country if
>> given half the chance.
>
>Well Alan can say anything he wants, but he has given no 
>*substantive* reasons to support his prejudices.  By her article
>against Net censorship, Schlafly has given us at least one piece
>of evidence to the contrary.

Has she published against net censorship?  The quoted article was about
wiretapping.  My search of her web site did not reveal any articles on that
topic.  If you have specific pointers I would like to see them.

>> Look at the people she chooses to associate with.
>
>Jesus hung out with tax collectors and prostitutes.  Look at the
>people he chose to associate with.  Guilt by association again?

But Jesus did not try to get the prostitutes and tax collectors elected to
high office...  (But then again, there are no contemporary records for the
existence of such a being in the first place.)

>Look folks, in this battle, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Actually I view this as a fallacy.  Just because the Christian Right opposes
Clinton for good reasons, does not make them friends for causes that I view
as just.

>We KNOW what Clinton and his gang think of our privacy and 
>freedom of speech on the Net.  Let's not cut off our noses to 
>spite our faces.  If Schlarly wants to lend a hand, let's not
>bite it, okay?

Lets also not accept them just because they oppose the current threat.  I
believe they have a number of threats of their own.

I do not disagree with the Eagle Forum on everything.  (I have just read
enough of her early works to make me consider her a danger to herself and
others...  Especially her screeds on Communism.)  She has some points I
consider valid on education and other areas.  But just because he makes
sense in some areas does not mean that I will trust either her or any of her
minions in any position of power.  Control freaks of either stripe worry me...

If they are willing to fight against the Clintonocracy, then i will be glad
to see it.  Just do not expect me to be willing to swallow their religious
beliefs as an alternative.

If you have pointers to material that shows that she is against net
censorship, then post pointers.  I would like to see them.  The posted
article does not address the net at all, other than as communication on a
one to one basis.  It does not address the issues of those who post
unencoded messages to the public at large.  Until I have text that shows
otherwise, i have little data to show that she supports freedom of speech
other than on a one to one basis.
---
Alan Olsen -- alano@teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano@teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."