Selection

[Jon Lebkowsky]

At 07:35 AM 7/7/97 -0700, Ronnie Morgan wrote:

>And the point I'm trying to make by bringing this out, everyone keeps
>saying that NOTHING can be done about it, you say that you agree that kids
>should not have access to porn but since the technology isn't there to keep
>them out, you shouldn't filter.  But as I have been trying to say, the
>technology **IS** there, we just have to come up with something that is
>acceptable on both sides of the issue, and the suggestion above is an
>example of someone not believeing this "technology isn't there" junk.  

Ronnie, I don't know that anyone ask argued that 'nothing can be done.'
E.g. we at EFF-Austin espouse parental education and involvement.

Technologies are necessarily broad...but if you got the porn sites to label
themselves .xxx and got a consensus to filter those sites, you wouldn't
hear much of an argument from me.  But you won't be blocking all the stuff
you find offensive, and parental involvement will remain an issue.

>Also, the post about ALA and it's stand on filters is irrelevant (at least
>to this debate) since it can't be argued that children have the "right" to
>porn.  And, since adults can/should ask to have the filter program turned
>off, no one is losing thier "Constitutionally protected speech".

Whatever.
Jon Lebkowsky // jonl at onr.com

"The interest in encouraging freedom of expression in a democratic society
outweighs any theoretical but unproven benefit of censorship." -- Justice
Stevens, Supreme Court Opinion in Reno v ACLU.