[1446] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
So what is the answer?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (tower@bu-it.BU.EDU)
Tue Oct 8 22:28:54 1991
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 91 22:28:57 EDT
From: tower@bu-it.BU.EDU
To: edtjda@magic322.chron.com
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: Joe Abernathy's message of Tue, 8 Oct 91 17:47:02 CDT <9110082247.AA14436@magic322.chron.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 91 17:47:02 CDT
From: edtjda@magic322.chron.com (Joe Abernathy)
Let's cut to the chase: alt.sex.bestiality is an indefensible
application of public funds. It's an indefensible thing to bring
into the public schools. It's equally unnacceptable to allow the
government to serve as censor.
I do NOT wish to be quoted.
It's not clear to me if these actions are indefensible or not. The
ruckus over these is due to the fact that some Americans are very hung
up over sex.
How do you feel about the talk.religion.* or soc.religion.*
newsgroups? Using public funds to distribute them is a clear
violation of the US Constitution's required separation of church and
state. Or is it?
-len
