« January 2006 | Main | March 2006 »

February 22, 2006

A woe as crooked as a bucket o' snakes'

Well Ollie, this is another fine mess you've gotten us into.”
We Americans have a knack for putting our foot into things we can't just scrape off.

We are in the process of doing two things, the sum of which surely sticks to the shoe.

One, we are patting the media on the back for not publishing cartoons that offend Muslims; and, two, we are taking the high-tech companies to task for helping block pornography and criticism of the government from the Internet in China.

OK, I believe American companies should not be involved, as some are accused of, in assisting countries to garner evidence against political dissidents thereby getting them put in jail. (Of course, we have made similar lists of political dissidents in this country before haven't we?)

But wait just a hypocritical minute.

What is this? The part that stood out to me as a father is that the Chinese are effectively blocking pornography from the Internet. And we want them to stop? Is that the case?

So we could also block pornography if we wanted to? Is that right?

Well then, since the majority of religious people in the world find pornography offensive, why is it again that we can't block it and be patted on the back for our professional restraint?

Oh, that's right, freedom of expression. And because it makes a lot of money for someone, and, as Mark Twain said, “Virtue never has been as acceptable as money.”

But freedom of expression can't really be the reason any more. We have just recently been reminded that freedom of expression should have restraints such as, “Although we have a right to disseminate it, sometimes we shouldn't if it is offensive to a large group of people.” My Mississippi-born father-in-law Kenemore would say that the problem we just opened up is “as crooked as a bucket o' snakes.”

We must maintain the freedom guaranteed to us mainly by the ancestors of our British-American citizens who handed these rights down, and among them is this freedom to express one's self.

Therefore, to block pornography is to be downright un-American, we are told by the American Civil Liberties Union, so we back off. Obviously it isn't unChinese.

But haven't we just been told that the media's self-censoring of Muslim cartoons was the right thing to do? So then, why isn't it a good thing to self-censor pornography?

Then there is e-mail in general.

I meticulously avoid anything that I don't

know for sure what it is, and I still get a handful of e-mails a day selling me offensive stuff I don't need, want or want anyone in my family to have to read about.
And then there is Ikeeweebie Iknamuko, barrister of Africa, who keeps trying to “sincerely contact me for a true response,” and I can't stop him because we have to keep the Internet free and clear of censorship. And he says I have been chosen to help him “and the banished prince” get millions of dollars in diamond money out of Africa, and all I have to do is send my bank numbers to him. And even though it is offensive that a lot of elder Americans believe this nonsense and send off their bank numbers to “that nice African man,” who then cleans out their bank accounts, we can't weed him out and make him stop.

It would be unconstitutional.

I really wonder if the framers of the Constitution could possibly have envisioned these problems in the 18th century where the pinnacle of high-tech was the water wheel and the potato peeler.

If they had seen it, in some twist of back-to-the-future happenstance, wouldn't they have tucked in a P.S. somewhere in the freedom of expression part that said, “Oh yeah, but if someone starts sending pictures of their genitalia into your home to your teenage daughter on some type of worldwide electrical tube, you can make them stop and it won't be considered a break with freedom of expression.” So, Ollie, look what we have done.

By linking the words “unless it is objectionable or offensive to a large group of people” to “freedom of expression,” we have put a new light on our constitutional freedoms.

So, I agree, let's not print religious cartoons anymore. It's offensive. A woe as crooked as a bucket o' snakes'

Posted by connpost on 2:28 PM | Comments (10)