Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version VT2.2 2/15/84; site vortex.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!vortex!lauren From: lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) Newsgroups: net.women,net.misc Subject: censorship Message-ID: <257@vortex.UUCP> Date: Fri, 17-Feb-84 21:47:36 EST Article-I.D.: vortex.257 Posted: Fri Feb 17 21:47:36 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 18-Feb-84 10:12:31 EST Organization: Vortex Technology, Los Angeles Lines: 20 I won't bother with the obvious arguments regarding censorship "contagion", "who" makes the decisions about what will be censored?, etc. Instead, I'll just point out one thing. Unless you're going to become Draconian to the extent of Saudi Arabia or Iran in terms of criminal code, you simply CANNOT successfully abolish pornography, and maybe not even then. Hell, "kiddie porn" is already illegal, and it's still all over the place. All you do is drive the stuff underground, which is primarily of benefit to organized crime, who then gets an even bigger share of such enterprises than they probably have now. People that want it will still get it. In many cases, even more people will end up wanting it, since once you've made it "forbidden" it becomes tantilizing to more people... It seems particularly appropriate that such suggestions are made in 1984. I might also refer people to the "Fire Chief's monologue" (spoken in the "secret library") from "Fahrenheit 451". --Lauren--