Theos-Talk Archives (February 1996 Message tl00052)

At 09:54 PM 2/9/96 -0500, you wrote:
>I need to add a problem to what Alexis said, because I too believe in the
>freedom of speech, & something occurred here locally, & I don't know how I
>would deal with it. 2 Grammar school boys got instructions from the Internet
>about how to make a primitive bomb. They had already tried it out, & were
>getting ready to bomb their school, when they got caught. I'd like to get
>some opinions of others on this net as to how they would handle this, not
>the boys so much, but the fact that someone can put on the internet
>instructions on how to make a bomb for kids to learn. How do you deal with
this?
>Liesel
>Member TI, HR, 5thRR
>............................................................................
>
Liesel:

I wish I knew an answer to your question, and so does the American Civil
Liberty Union. How much freedom is too much freedom? Therre's a theory known
as "The Slippery Slope" and those of us who are civil libertarians worrry
about it alot. The theory asks at what point does control become oppressive.
At what point to our constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression end?
Sure it's terrible for young boys to find bomb making instructions on the
internet, in fact, no one, young or not really needs bomb making
instructions. But if we deny that level of free expression,where will it
stop? The problem with the intenet is the immense difficulty in finding out
who published suchinformation, and then, prooving that they published it
with malice aforethought rather than as an infantile joke. It is usually the
practice to try to deal with actions not words, those boys built a bomb,
they knew it was wrong to do so, they knew people would be harmed were they
to use the bomb. Let's deal with the boys and their bomb. The most important
thing involved herein is public education of allpeople. We have got to get
it across, somehow, that harming other people isn't anything anyone should
want to do. What's the ethical difference between bomb Making and placing
"Viruses" on the loose to damage or destroy other peoples computers? What's
the difference between bomb making and drive-by shootings? It's the entire
ethical fibre of this nation that's in bad condition and giving up our
freedoms to "deal with" all this violence etc. is probably the worst
possible way to do it. It's a terrific conundrum and one which theosophists
should be concerned for unless I am terribly mistaken the provision of a far
better world to live in is a major part of the original program of the
society. I wish I could be more helpful. But in this case the kind of
simplistic ansers the Republican Right are proffereing to cure the problem
are far, far, worse tha the problem.

alexis dolgorukii
>
>>At 11:37 AM 2/8/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>>Dear Murray,
>>>Perhaps things are different in New Zealand, but in the US we consider any
>>>attempt to control ideas to be very bad indeed, no matter what the idea.
>>>  This creates certain tensions in our society, but as a people we tend to
>>>believe that you can never have too much freedom and people who think
>>>otherwise learn very quickly how little attention we pay to their laws.
>>>Chuck
>>>Member TI
>>>Heretic
>>>Troublemaker
>>>
>>>Note to all who are interested:
>>
>>President Clinton signed the Telecommunications Bill, which was badly
>>needed. It is important to remember that the censorship of the Inter-net was
>>a "rider" to that bill attached by Senator James Exxon. That's one of
>>america's big problems, ill intended people put really nasty or self-serving
>>"riders" on to bills providing vital services and, in effect, Blackmail the
>>President into signing the Bill. The Budget Bill is a prime example of this.
>>But it is true too, that at almost the moment of signing the bill, law suits
>>challanging its constitutionality were filed. It is almost certain that the
>>courts will rejct that portion of the bill as clearly contravening the "Free
>>Speech" provisions of the american Constituion.  Most American's see free
>>speech as probably the most vital of our vaunted "Freedoms". I do too!
>>
>>alexis dolgorukii, member T.I.>