kdd@well.UUCP (09/18/86)
References: > I'm always struck by the implied elitism of the >censorship supporters in these arguments. Censorship implies >censors, people who will read/hear/see *lots* of this stuff, like >the commission did. But they're respectable folks, so they're OK. >And Mark is no doubt sure it won't corrupt *him* if he should >happen to experience it. I'm sure it wouldn't corrupt me, too. >How 'bout the rest of you? Any of you think your morals would be >corrupted by porn? Or is it always other people's morals? Yeah! Just who are these *other people* anyway, huh? Oh, oh, I see... the *other people* are the rapists and murderers! Now I get it, *we* can view this stuff without being corrupted, but statistics show that rapists and murderers that view porn all go out and rape and murder! Never mind that the statistics also show that rapists and murderers that eat pizza, drive cars, wake up in the morning, etc. also go out and rape and murder, because those things are politically ok. Keith Doyle # {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd # cadovax!keithd@ucla-locus.arpa "Lies, damned lies, and statistics"