[Bug-gne]Allowing "unsavoury" content

[Tom Chance]

The issue is really very simple. We allow everything.
Are we advocating the banning of information on how to
make a bomb, like the Anarchists Cookbook, just
because somebody might use it the wrong way? Somebody
could use an interesting chemistry article to make
some sort of toxic or poisonous substance. The only
reason people take articles like that the wrong way is
because they have been brought up on the idea of
outside protection from them. By not letting people
read articles in necrophilia, the subject gets a sort
of taboo which is attractive to some, and so becomes
not a normal subject of discussion but an unhealthy,
and often dangerous obsession.

It is like going back 500 years and saying we can't
allow articles about sex, and the education of sex,
because it is indecent and may lead to X and Y. It is
a ridiculous notion. In 500 years from now I think
people will laugh at us thinking about blocking, or
reviewing or editing out pro-death articles.

I don't care about guilt by association. Millions of
people die every week because of the greed of the
West, so why should we be so hung up when society so
fails a person that they take perfectly good
information (or misinformation, however you may view
it) and use it in "the wrong way". If we want to care
about this sort of thing, care about the freedom of
billions and the death of millions, not a few isolated
cases blown apart by a media obsessed with
scapegoating small factions of beliefs. Beware of the
media, it will have you loving the opressors and
hating the opressed.

Tom Chance

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/