Re: Challange- the 'fruits' of censorship (fwd)

Ian Dorion (dorioni@intellinet.com)
Thu, 01 May 1997 11:42:38 -0600

(Ian 5/1) Of course he's a fascist. Of course he's not going to be a facsist
until he or his ilk gets in control of things. He wouldn't come out in support
for prayer in school - but once it got in, he'd be 100% behind it. All fundies
make great Nazi's when given the chance.

For some reason my e-mail is not going out right away. I'll have to check.

Miracle wrote:
>
> RJV 5/1
> Does anyone else see that Jerry McDonald is being a bit fascist? Nothing
> like a bit of authoritarianism to make one feel powerful...
>
> -- R Jason Valentine ..ooOO miracle@procyon.com
>
> Dilbert: "I've identified the brain chemical that controls happiness. And
> I found the exact mix of fruit and vegetable juices that stimulate its
> production. Do you realize what this means?"
>
> Dogbert: "Yeah. Fruits and vegetables will be banned by the government."
>
> FBI Guy #1: "We're the government. We came to confiscate your so-called
> 'Happiness Drug'."
>
> Dilbert: "It's not a drug! It's just a mixture of fruits and vegetables
> that makes you feel happy! You can't outlaw good nutrition!"
>
> FBI Guy #2: "Hmm...I guess that wouldn't make sense, would it?"
>
> FBI Guy #1: "Ignore him. He's a new guy. Erase all the formulas for
> making your 'Happiness Potion' and we won't jail you."
>
> Dilbert: "Okay, Okay..."
>
> FBI Guy #1: "You citizens only have the right to PURSUE happiness -
> you're not actually allowed to BE happy."
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 13:06:30 -0700
> From: John Hamilton <jlhamltn@pacbell.net>
> To: 'errancy' <errancy@infidels.org>
> Subject: Challange- the 'fruits' of censorship
>
> Below is a posting to challenge complaining about my signature file, and my reply.
> Once people start censoring objectionable speech the next step is always objectionable ideas.
>
> John Hamilton
> Jlhamltn@pacbell.net
>
> The other day upon the stair,
> I met a man that wasn't there.
> He wasn't there again today,
> I wish I wish he'd go away.
>
> "There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of
> donkeys, and whose emission was like that of horses." -Ezekial 23:20
> (I borrowed this from Yoel, it has become my favorite Bible verse)
>
> |,,|/
>
> <X><
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Hamilton [SMTP:jlhamltn@pacbell.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 1997 12:32 PM
> To: 'Jerry McDonald'; April Dorsey-Tyler; Bill Carrell; Bob Bauer; Castonguay, Gregory; D.B. Willis; Daniel J. Wolfram; David Adkins; Eric B.
Hedden; Farre
> Subject: RE: John Hamilton's remarks
>
> John Hamilton
> Jlhamltn@pacbell.net
>
> The other day upon the stair,
> I met a man that wasn't there.
> He wasn't there again today,
> I wish I wish he'd go away.
>
> What, pray tell is crude about that poem? Know you are going to censor us on our signature file? I challenge you to find one (1) thing crude about that poem.
>
> "There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of
> donkeys, and whose emission was like that of horses." -Ezekial 23:20
>
> Now, this could be considered to be crude, but it is a Bible quote, are you saying that Bible quotes are inappropriate to a Bible discussion list?
>
> |,,|/
>
> This is the American sign language symbol for I love you, are expressions of love inappropriate for this list?
>
> <X><
>
> This is my own opinion about the Christian religion. Is it ok for a Christian to put "In His service" or some such thing but not for an atheist to express his
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry McDonald [SMTP:jerry@cwent.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 1997 11:56 AM
> To: April Dorsey-Tyler; Bill Carrell; Bob Bauer; Castonguay, Gregory; D.B. Willis; Daniel J. Wolfram; David Adkins; Eric B. Hedden; Farrell Till; Fred D. W
> Subject: Fw: John Hamilton's remarks
>
> ----------
> > Date: Wednesday, April 30, 1997 02:32:28
> > From: L. Davis
> > To: jerry@cwent.com
> > Subject: John Hamilton's remarks
> >
> >
> > Personally, I find your cutesy crude poems offensive and don't believe
> they
> > have any relevancy to any discussion on this list. Could you please
> refrain?
> >