From: "Philip A. Mongelluzzo" <phimon@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:39:04 +0800
To: Alan <alano@teleport.com>
Subject: Re: spam on this list
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970623063123.0092e8c0@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19970623192551.00935250@popd.ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



I truly admire how you (and others) infer what you have from my post.
Simply remarkable.

I will keep my statements short and direct for those of you who have had to
much coffee.

I support the constitution.  In the case of the first ammendment: The
freedom it allows you, or whoever, to send spam and indulge in child
pornography is the same freedom provided to those who say those ideas are
wrong.  Got it?

I did not intend to infer any sexuality of any kind.

The question still stands --- please try not to rant --- attempt to post
your constructive thoughs:

How do we deal with child pornography and free speech in such a way as to
allow both to exist and insure our children are not exposed to pornographic
material until they are at a maturity level where they can deal with it?

If pornography is the enemy of crypto then that is enemy that must be fought. 

A battle that must be won without killing the enemy to insure continued
free speech.  Quite a challenge I think.

Now, do you have any idea how to do that?
At 10:42 AM 6/23/97 -0700, you wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Philip A. Mongelluzzo wrote:
>
>> I certainly agree with free speech and understand how it can be manipulated
>> by the scum bags at large in society, _BUT_ free speech is free speech.
>> The warts come from an ever increasing BENT society.
>
>No you don't.  You believe in free speach for the things that do not tweak
>your worldview.  I am certainly willing to bet that if you had the chance
>to remove the rights of the "bent" people from expressing their views, you
>would not hesitate in the slightest.
>
>> I still am concerned about kids being subject to material that is
>> inappropriate for their age group (what ever that may be).  
>
>"Whatever that may be" is a very telling statement.  How can you tell what
>is "appropreate" or "not".  What the media tells you?  What your religious
>leaders tell you?  What the voices in your head tell you?  What the
>government tells you?  All of those values are subjective.  They depend on
>what you may or may not believe is "harmful".  Most of that is based on
>cultural conditioning.
>
>>So how do I
>> insure that my son/daugher does not get their hands on _THIS_ material?
>
>Kill them now.  Stick them in a box and feed them through a slot in the
>door. Gouge out their eyes. Cut off their hands.
>
>> Twenty seven years ago I took an oath to do whatever was needed to protect
>> and defend the constitution against all enemies (domestic and foreign)  But
>> what is the solution to this problem from a parents point of view?
>
>You view the constitution as a problem?  Free speach as a problem?
>
>Or maybe you have a problem that your children might learn about things
>that you disapprove of?  Maybe they might read something that shows them
>that sex is a part of life, not just something that is a side benefit of
>marriage.  Maybe they might learn that sex is fun!  Maybe they will find
>out that the religion their parents saddled them with is based on lies and
>urban legend.  maybe they will find that their government is not so kind
>and benevolent after all.  Maybe they will find out that their parents are
>human and make mistakes.  Or maybe they will even figure out that the
>material the parents are so afraid of are only harmful to the parents...
>
>>  Simple
>> - control the material.  Make it like liquor, guns, booze.  Oops.. for some
>> reason this is a violation of the 1st amendment to!
>
>It is also an impossibility.  People have tried to control the natural
>interest in sex since the dawn of time.  Has not worked yet.  Porn has
>existed since man discovered woman.  Some of the earliest existing films
>are porno movies.  What has changed is access and awareness.  Until
>reletive reciently porn has been more underground.  But with the spread of
>technology, it has become easier and easier to supply the demand for such
>things.
>
>Or as a certain math professor once said... "Dirty books are fun!"
>
>>  Ok, my mistake, its my
>> problem.  That's easy, no Internet access.  Now my kid is at a
>> disadvantage!  I keep loosing here.  I don't like the way this is beginning
>> to feel!!
>
>Your kid is already at a disadvantage.  His parents have lost perspective.
>
>> I'm sure that the community on this list has discussed this problem at
>> length.  What is the best defense?  How do we get the message out or,
>> better yet, deliver it?  
>
>You assume that it actually is a problem.  Your moral qualms over pictures
>of sexual activity does not a problem make.
>
>it is people like yourself who are activly destroying what little remains
>of the constitution.  You want an exception for this and a rationalization
>for that until thre is nothing left but the blandest and most tasteless
>thoughts and speach.
>
>> Whatever that is, we need to do the same thing for the 2nd Ammendment, and
>> the 3rd, and so on.
>
>Like actually follow it?  Wow!  That would be a first.
>
>> The challenge to write code could be fun, but maybe we should use our
>> collective wisdom to deliver the best of the best solutions (there may be
>> more than one) to our elected officials.  Load their mailboxes up with
>> solutions to problems.  Sooner or later more than one of them is going to
>> think its his/her idea and push it along.  Web sites can be set up to
>> assist them with details.  I'm sure you get the idea.
>
>You are talking to the wrong group of people.  What you are asking for is
>a way to censor the masses.
>
>Anything an adult can get, a child can get.
>
>Attempts to censor children and control what they hear, see and feel are
>vague attempts to do the same to adults.  You cannot control the
>information feed to children without controling the information feed for
>adults. (But deep down in your heart you would like to see that as well.)
>
>> Just another citizen wondering if anything is going to be left for our
>> grandchildren.
>
>You think this information will harm them?  Actually the control freak
>mentality you want to impose is far far worse.  In actuality, much of the
>problems you would like to blame on porn are, in actuality, borne out of
>this country's hypocracy and neurosis about sex and sexuality.  the reason
>people are so fucked up about fucking is because they have been taught
>that sex is somehow wrong and shameful and dirty.  That appreciating the
>beauty of the sexual act is somehow more vile and disgusting than showing
>someone shot full of holes.
>
>I think you need to examine WHY this information makes you uncomfortable.
>You might learn something about yourself.  But don't expect us to help
>inflict your sickness on the minds of your children.
>
>alano@teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."
>
>
>At 10:42 AM 6/23/97 -0700, Alan wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Philip A. Mongelluzzo wrote:
>
>> I certainly agree with free speech and understand how it can be manipulated
>> by the scum bags at large in society, _BUT_ free speech is free speech.
>> The warts come from an ever increasing BENT society.
>
>No you don't.  You believe in free speach for the things that do not tweak
>your worldview.  I am certainly willing to bet that if you had the chance
>to remove the rights of the "bent" people from expressing their views, you
>would not hesitate in the slightest.
>
>> I still am concerned about kids being subject to material that is
>> inappropriate for their age group (what ever that may be).  
>
>"Whatever that may be" is a very telling statement.  How can you tell what
>is "appropreate" or "not".  What the media tells you?  What your religious
>leaders tell you?  What the voices in your head tell you?  What the
>government tells you?  All of those values are subjective.  They depend on
>what you may or may not believe is "harmful".  Most of that is based on
>cultural conditioning.
>
>>So how do I
>> insure that my son/daugher does not get their hands on _THIS_ material?
>
>Kill them now.  Stick them in a box and feed them through a slot in the
>door. Gouge out their eyes. Cut off their hands.
>
>> Twenty seven years ago I took an oath to do whatever was needed to protect
>> and defend the constitution against all enemies (domestic and foreign)  But
>> what is the solution to this problem from a parents point of view?
>
>You view the constitution as a problem?  Free speach as a problem?
>
>Or maybe you have a problem that your children might learn about things
>that you disapprove of?  Maybe they might read something that shows them
>that sex is a part of life, not just something that is a side benefit of
>marriage.  Maybe they might learn that sex is fun!  Maybe they will find
>out that the religion their parents saddled them with is based on lies and
>urban legend.  maybe they will find that their government is not so kind
>and benevolent after all.  Maybe they will find out that their parents are
>human and make mistakes.  Or maybe they will even figure out that the
>material the parents are so afraid of are only harmful to the parents...
>
>>  Simple
>> - control the material.  Make it like liquor, guns, booze.  Oops.. for some
>> reason this is a violation of the 1st amendment to!
>
>It is also an impossibility.  People have tried to control the natural
>interest in sex since the dawn of time.  Has not worked yet.  Porn has
>existed since man discovered woman.  Some of the earliest existing films
>are porno movies.  What has changed is access and awareness.  Until
>reletive reciently porn has been more underground.  But with the spread of
>technology, it has become easier and easier to supply the demand for such
>things.
>
>Or as a certain math professor once said... "Dirty books are fun!"
>
>>  Ok, my mistake, its my
>> problem.  That's easy, no Internet access.  Now my kid is at a
>> disadvantage!  I keep loosing here.  I don't like the way this is beginning
>> to feel!!
>
>Your kid is already at a disadvantage.  His parents have lost perspective.
>
>> I'm sure that the community on this list has discussed this problem at
>> length.  What is the best defense?  How do we get the message out or,
>> better yet, deliver it?  
>
>You assume that it actually is a problem.  Your moral qualms over pictures
>of sexual activity does not a problem make.
>
>it is people like yourself who are activly destroying what little remains
>of the constitution.  You want an exception for this and a rationalization
>for that until thre is nothing left but the blandest and most tasteless
>thoughts and speach.
>
>> Whatever that is, we need to do the same thing for the 2nd Ammendment, and
>> the 3rd, and so on.
>
>Like actually follow it?  Wow!  That would be a first.
>
>> The challenge to write code could be fun, but maybe we should use our
>> collective wisdom to deliver the best of the best solutions (there may be
>> more than one) to our elected officials.  Load their mailboxes up with
>> solutions to problems.  Sooner or later more than one of them is going to
>> think its his/her idea and push it along.  Web sites can be set up to
>> assist them with details.  I'm sure you get the idea.
>
>You are talking to the wrong group of people.  What you are asking for is
>a way to censor the masses.
>
>Anything an adult can get, a child can get.
>
>Attempts to censor children and control what they hear, see and feel are
>vague attempts to do the same to adults.  You cannot control the
>information feed to children without controling the information feed for
>adults. (But deep down in your heart you would like to see that as well.)
>
>> Just another citizen wondering if anything is going to be left for our
>> grandchildren.
>
>You think this information will harm them?  Actually the control freak
>mentality you want to impose is far far worse.  In actuality, much of the
>problems you would like to blame on porn are, in actuality, borne out of
>this country's hypocracy and neurosis about sex and sexuality.  the reason
>people are so fucked up about fucking is because they have been taught
>that sex is somehow wrong and shameful and dirty.  That appreciating the
>beauty of the sexual act is somehow more vile and disgusting than showing
>someone shot full of holes.
>
>I think you need to examine WHY this information makes you uncomfortable.
>You might learn something about yourself.  But don't expect us to help
>inflict your sickness on the minds of your children.
>
>alano@teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."
>
>
>