Freedom of Speech - Abortion

[Ronnie Morgan]

** Reply to note from  <engwall at uthscsa.edu> 02/12/96  1:59pm -0800

> Gee, and I thought my job was to develop new ways to access information, 
> not restrict it. 

Yes, if you are going to be a responsible information provider, you do need to  
restrict access to it.  But only if it is obscene/indecent material, such as  
pornography.  Doesn't anyone use common sense about stuff like this anymore?   
If we did, the bill NEVER would have needed to be made.  All of you are fussing  
about something you should have done yourselves....

> Oh, I see.  And do you maintain that these "behind-closed-doors" rape 
> crisis centers turn away anyone under 18?  The bill does not distinguish 
> between solicited vs. non-solicited information for people under 18.  If 
> they can access it, mum's the word.  So, are you suggesting that kids don't 
> need access to this information?  It doesn't matter if their parents are 
> there.  This bill doesn't cover such contingencies.  Under 18, everything's 
> Disneyland.  Boy, I wish I lived in your world. 

Never been to Disneyland.  Disney World, I have been to.  It's a pretty fun  
place.  

I'm not saying that kids "don't" need access to the internet.  There are a lot  
of good/fun things on the net just for kids.  

But, again I'll say this.  If people would have taken the responsiblily a long  
time ago, to make sure some kid isn't getting to their stuff, the bill never  
would have been thought of, and would never have been needed.  I guess in a way  
I'm saying that this whole mess that everyone is making is your fault.  

Let me say this one last thing, and then this will be it for me.  I've wasted  
enough of my work time debating this.  No judge in this world is going to do  
anything about a rape discussion group that happens to be including minors who  
have been raped.  That isn't the "spirit" of the bill, and thus would be  
considered as being "oaky" to do.  (BTW, I'm sure a rape prevention discussion  
would be appropriate for everyone)  But the discussion would, I would assume,  
have to keep other minors out.  And, I'm sure that any pornographic provider  
would be in a lot of trouble if they continued to allow access to minors.  But,  
everything that you people keep saying would be illegal simply would not be.   
Things like the bible, discussions on rape, aids, and whatever else all of you  
have mentioned, would still be legal.  Although I still haven't figured out why  
the bible would be illegal, unless you mean that religous discussions would be  
illegal as well.  I don't recall religion being in the bill, but, someone may  
interpret it as being obscene and indecent.

Put a little common sense in everything you do, and you will be fine.  And you  
can quote me on that, if you wish.

Have a good day!


Ronnie Morgan
Team OS/2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Harding University Library        Internet : rmorgan at harding.edu
Systems Manager                                       
Box 2267, Searcy, AR  72149       Phone : (501) 279-4077 (voice)