The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "purity" package

Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
> I don't quite understand why these Americans who are so keen not to be
> censored are also so keen to stop anyone having the chance to read the
> bible.  It seems it's OK to publish stuff promoting bestiality, child
> rape and endless violence, but not to let people pray or to read about
> how God gave himself up to death for our sake.  Does that make sense?
> Not to me!

STRAW MAN.  This is making me REALLY FUCKED OFF.

It is a frequent response of people who want to apply a double
standard (allow X but disallow Y) to complain that their opponents
want to apply the complementary double standard (disallow X but allow
Y).  This is not usually the case; usually, their opponents want
consistency: either disallow X, OR allow Y - and often these opponents
hope that disallowing X is too painful for those with the double
standard, and hope therefore to ensure that Y is allowed.  So,
applying this to the instant case:

NO-ONE is "trying to stop anyone having the chance to read the bible".

We're just saying that if things are to be removed because they are
offensive then all offensive things should be removed.  Naturally this
annoys people who feel the bible is important, just as censorship of
sexually-related or any other topic annoys those who feel that sex (or
the other topic) is important, interesting or fun.

The solution to this problem is NOT TO HAVE THE CENSORSHIP.

Furthermore, you are begging the question: why should I care what you
believe about your god ?  Your personal views on religion have no
place in this discussion, unless you want to get into "but this thing
is _good_ so we must allow it, whereas this other thing is _bad_" -
which begs the question, of course, as to whose standard is to be
used, and opens the way to huge flamewars about the goodness or
badness of things.

> Most of the people who wrote your constitution would have thought the
> Supreme Court's judgments on public prayer utterly insane and evil.
> We certainly don't need such folly spread across the rest of the
> world.

This is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.

We are NOT going to have TGGD (The Great God Debate) on
debian-private, are we ?  Ferchrissake.

Ian.


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .