Posted by beardedlady on May 24, 2002, at 16:41:32
In reply to Re: I'll try this one last time and call it good » kid_A, posted by Ron Hill on May 24, 2002, at 15:30:36
> No, that's not quite true. Everyone is subject to the law of the land, our friend Dr. Bob included. Federal law requires that religious speech be given equal status as other forms of speech in the market place of ideas. In other words, to remove posts from PSB, solely because the posts are religious in nature, is illegal. In legal terms this is referred to as "viewpoint discrimination."
This is not quite true. If some religious speech is deemed offensive, if it falls within the guidelines of incivility, if it accuses or blames or does anything against Dr. Bob's civility contract, it has no place, nor any rights, on this board.
I like to cuss. Others find it offensive. Dr. Bob says no cussing. This easily falls under "viewpoint discrimination," too. Why weren't you rallying behind our legal right to cuss?
Right now, it's our debate. Unless someone takes legal action, we will never know which freedoms are protected on this web site. I do know this: I'd rather just do what Dr. Bob wants us to do here. I don't want to make trouble for him. I'd prefer that Lou do his thing and that others not read it and stop arguing about it. But If I were Dr. Bob, I'd be so frustrated right now that I'd shut the whole show down. Maybe he has more patience than that.
> Please note that, within each and every section of the newspaper, constitutionally guaranteed speech is protected. Religious speech can not be censored (solely because it is religious in nature) in the Sports Section, or in the Style Section, or in the Classified Section, or in the News Section, or any in other section. Nor, might I add, in the PSB section.
This is wrong, too. The legal word for censorship is editor. You can't submit a piece about religion and sports to the sports section, have the editor reject it, and cry foul, as if you are being censored. Yet you are. Maybe your work wasn't good enough. Or maybe the editor didn't want god in that section of the paper. But it's not your Constitutional right to be published in someone else's newspaper, even if it's just the Letters section.
You have the right to self publish and not be censored. But this is Dr. Bob's site. It is not yours. You're pretty much Constitutionally guaranteed freedom to publish your own web site.
> IMHO, it's probably best to keep speculations of other people's motives to yourself since that falls under one of the subcategories of incivility.
IMHO, KidA's speculation was neither accusatory nor uncivil nor a put down.
lateformy beer-dy
poster:beardedlady
thread:5247
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020510/msgs/5265.html