This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: Obscene content in cygwin file.
- From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" <g dot r dot vansickle at worldnet dot att dot net>
- To: <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 19:36:45 -0600
- Subject: RE: Obscene content in cygwin file.
The David Korn who is not the Korn Shell guy wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Christopher Faylor
> > Sent: 07 January 2005 14:52
> > Business issues are not the point here, though. My issue is that I
> > grant others the right to be offended by the type of language we're
> > talking about. It is a given that there are many people in our
> > society who will be offended by it. These people do not
> buy Playboy
> > or Hustler because they do not like what these magazines
> represent but
> > they aren't out picketing those establishments, either.
> So, they are
> > following the "Just don't look at it then!" scenario.
> That unfortunately is not true.
Yes, it is.
> In this country we've just
> had a theatre play shut down by threats of violence from one
> group of religious bigots, and there is currently an ongoing
> pressure campaign from another group of religious bigots to
> try and pressure the BBC into pulling an as-yet unscreened
> program on the grounds that if it was screened and if they
> did happen to watch it they might be offended.
Irrelevant to the issue at hand.
> Of course, if they're forewarned enough to know that they
> might find this program offensive, they're perfectly well
> forewarned enough to not end up watching it by accident, but
> that's not good enough for them, and the reason why it's not
> good enough for them is that the potential offence they might
> suffer is a mere pretext, and their real concern is to try
> and compel everyone else to be like they are by controlling
> what we may see and hear in an effort to control how we
> think. It's coercive evangelism. Forcible recruitment.
> Religious pressganging. Blackmail, brainwashing and mind control.
Continues to be irrelevant to the issue at hand.
> So no, I'm no longer prepared to automatically extend to
> people the right to take offence at what I say or do, since
> they regularly abuse that right in an attempt to - well,
> basically, to enslave others and rule over their minds. It's
> insanity to hand every single religious crank with an agenda
> to push an absolute veto over anything and everything you
> might ever want to do or say.
You didn't write "fortune", nor do you distribute it. Hence, this is also
irrelevant to the issue at hand. You're three for three!
> I do not believe people have the right to jump up and
> voluntarily *choose* to be offended by things that are
> perfectly reasonable to all those who are actually involved
> or affected.
Hmm. I see we made the right decision back in 1776. Here in the good ol'
U. S. of A. you get to *choose* to be offended or not offended by whatever
you want. Hell, you can even change what offends you from day to day!
> They *are* going into newsagents, pulling
> Playboy off the shelves, opening it up, reading it (probably
> hypocritically enjoying it too), and then whining about how
> offended they are and demanding that the entire world be made
> conform to their personal tastes and beliefs.
1. Then they're vandalizing the newsie's property, seeing as Playboy comes
in a convenient sealed plastic bag.
2. Nobody's doing that.
3. Now you're four for four.
> It's in this way that solipsism turns into dictatorial oppression.
Ok, so lemme see if'n I got this here right y'all:
De-obscenifying "fortune" will directly lead to a New World Order of
Stalinist-era dictatorial oppression.
W. O. W.
Come on Korny, sing it with me: "Crazy, but that's how it goes..."
Gary R. Van Sickle
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html