Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!amdcad!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!cos!hadron!decuac!c3pe!aliza
From: aliza@c3pe.UUCP (Aliza R. Panitz (AlmostLady))
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Who defines Net.Porn ?
Keywords: porn, underage, lawsuit
Message-ID: <3498@c3pe.UUCP>
Date: 25 Sep 88 14:32:20 GMT
References: <1278@cbnews.ATT.COM> <4805@whuts.UUCP>
Reply-To: aliza@c3pe.UUCP (Aliza R. Panitz (AlmostLady))
Distribution: na
Organization: K. L. Ginter & Associates, Inc.
Lines: 30

In article <4805@whuts.UUCP> wv@whuts.UUCP (54299-DUNCAN,W.) writes:
>In article <1278@cbnews.ATT.COM> wbt@cbnews(William B. Thacker) writes:
>>one closed-minded fundamentalist finding out that 12-year-olds with
>>computers and modems can get access to alt.sex, soc.motss, soc.women,
>>and other "adult theme" groups.
>
>Soc.women?! Soc.motss?! You're kidding, right? What do you think goes 
>on there? There's a big difference between the restriction of pornography
>and the restriction of information. 

Who is going to be in charge of determining what is or is not pornography??

I've never seen anything in soc.motss that I would consider offensive.  On 
the other hand, I've seen very little in there that my mother would NOT
consider offensive.  Who makes the rules???

Recent Virginia laws make it a serious offense for a store to sell materials
that are LATER found to be "obscene".  A simple extension of that law
would be: "Oops, your public access Unix machine has an article, posted
two weeks ago, that we found to be obscene today. We'll confiscate
the machine."

Scary, huh?



-- 
- Aliza (AlmostLady) (decuac.dec.com!c3pe!aliza or backbone!decuac!c3pe!aliza)

Life's a bitch...  and so am I