Chambers wrote:
> OK, after Darren's argument that both bad and good people have been
> censored in the past,

That wasn't what I said. I said there *are* obvious examples of where the 
world might have been a better place had certain people been censored. Not 
that they had been. (Altho I expect many people have been censored that 
would have both improved and disimproved the world too, it's difficult to 
point to one.)

 > can we at least agree that Censorship makes sense
> when someone is advocating infringing on the rights, freedoms, liberties
> and property of others, 

No. "Rights" and "freedom" and "properties" are nebulous terms when you're 
talking about individuals interacting, just like the word "fair" doesn't 
really make sense.

Your right to "control your body" infringes on the "baby's right to life." 
Your right to ride on the bus infringes on my right not to have to sit next 
to you. Your right to polygamy infringes on my right to the sanctity of 
marriage. Your right to freedom infringes on my right to hold slaves.

In the USA, truth is an absolute defense against an accusation of slander. 
If what I say about you is true, you can't complain that my saying it is 
injuring you. In addition, an individual can rarely slander someone more 
powerful than that individual. In other words, the New York Times can 
slander Darren, but it's almost impossible for Darren to slander the New 
York Times. The assumption is that the defense against me saying bad things 
about you is you denying them, and only when your ability to say bad things 
about me greatly outweighs my ability to deny them do these sorts of laws 
come into effect. (In theory.)

The problem with the "right not to be offended" is that it's never expressed 
as "offended". It's heresy (which is about god, not you), or "for the good 
of the children", or "dangerous to the public", or something like that. Prop 
8 wasn't passed because gay people were offensive. It was passed because 
"the sanctity of marriage is attacked".

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message