I agree with both of you
Submitted by Drifter on 2003-02-26 18:39:34, Wednesday
In reply to 'Go and sin no more' submitted by Forgiven on 2003-02-26 17:20:44, Wednesday
|
But I guess I failed to properly state what it is I was reffering to. So, most of your answers in the NAMBLA thread skipped over the real issue. When I brought it up I was following up on what was said about the Curley case (the case in which NAMBLA is being sued by the parents of a rape/murder victim claiming that NAMBLA is a criminal organization and partly responsible for their son's death). Thus to me it wasnt a NAMBLA discussion, but a first amendment discussion. It wouldve been the same had the people being blamed here been the KKK or some other group I dislike. What I tried to examine was whether a group is responsible for the actions of its members and whether it is right for groups to be forced to censor themselves for fear of being declared a criminal enterprise. The standard the plaintiffs whish to set here is a dangerous one, any group that supports a change in criminal laws is a criminal organization. Such a standard would affect a wide range of political action groups, from the ones we personally care little for (NAMBLA, neo-nazi's, NORML, etc.), to the ones that many of us would lend our support to (Pro-life groups for example). e-mail: webnomad@ziplip.com url: http://www.fpc.net/sites/drifter/ |
Follow ups: