@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Date: Mon, 1 Jan 1996 Sender: •••@••.••• Subject: Re: "Christian Right" (viewpoint) [cr-951231] Craig wrote: >The "indecency" provision, as written, is pure trash, literally >incinerates the First Amendment, and should be roundly condemned, >instead of lost in some wispy dialogue about the rights of the >"religious right." It is not *their* rights that are at stake. On >the contrary, *they* are endeavoring to deprive the rest of us of >certain inalienable rights. The true reason for this provision has nothing to do with morals. It is just our governement now realizes that with the internet we, all of us, no matter who we are, can speak freely and thousands listen. They are scarred that this country actually might become more democratic, and they will loose power. Pesach Lattin @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ On 1/02/96, Craig A. Johnson wrote: >> Robert Smith wrote: >> My theological views are fundamental. However, I defend the right >> for all people to express their beliefs, regardless of its content. >> I know many others who hold the same view. >You represent a very slim minority among the "religious right," >which is in direct opposition to the viewpoint of the primary >right-wing "Christian" lobby, the Christian Coalition, which is >loaded for bear with prescriptions about how all the rest of us >should lead our lives. ~--<snip of quoted material>--~ >> rkm wrote: >> It's all too easy for us citizens to divide into enemy camps, and >> then be played off against one another in legislative rhetoric. >> Mark reminds us to look for ways to find solidarity. It someone's >> ignorance is our enemy, then contact and education may be our weapon >> rather than opposition or derision. >I could not disagree more with regard to the organized lobby of the >Christian Coalition. Contact and education *has* had no effect on >this predatory interest group. The anti-porn group "Enough is >Enough" backed a compromise which would have changed the operative >language in the bill to "harmful to minors." But this was not enough >for the CC. They want the wholesale proscription of free speech on the >Net. ~--<snip of quoted material>--~ >Please... There is a time for everything -- a time for "contact and >education" and a time for "opposition and derision." Guess which >time it is now? It seems to me to be critical that we make this distinguish between the "the organized lobby of the Christian Coalition", and the people who are its supposed constituency. This is a coalition that is led from the top, and a good part of the propaganda that binds it together is misinformation about who "we" are and what we're about. I can understand why Craig calls Robert part of a "very slim minority", but is that true? And if so, does it have to stay that way? Why assume that everyone with a conservative religious bent is unalterably attached to everything the CC centralized truth pundits put out? No, I wouldn't waste much time being conciliatory with that leadership clique either, but we need to be aware that certain ways of opposing it are playing directly into its hands. It _thrives_ on divisiveness, finding things to hate seems to be its primary paradigm of recruitment. They _love_ it if our reaction is to ridicule Christianity. That let's them perpetuate their GoodGuy vs. BadGuy myths, and puts us in the category of "not worth listening to -- satan speaking". If we try to win the game of who has the most powerful TrueBeliever group, we'll lose, and we are losing. That's the home battlefield of the mass media and those who have posting rights to it -- which includes the CC but not us. If we're ever going to get anywhere with the kind of goals we talk about on this list, we need to find ways to seek allies and build coalitions on a much broader basis. Not by making backroom deals with CC lobbyists (as if we could), but by finding common ground at a lower level, closer to the grass roots, with many diverse people and groups. Again, I commend Robert for seeking to identify unifying principles. He said "I know many others who hold the same view." Perhaps he could help open up some channel of dialog. As Craig says, "There is a time for everything", and for us I'd say the time for more imaginative collaborations is overdue. Regards, Richard @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~ Posted by Richard K. Moore (•••@••.•••) Wexford, Ireland Cyber-Rights: http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/nii/cyber-rights/ CyberLib: http://www.internet-eireann.ie/cyberlib Materials may be reposted in their entirety for non-commercial use. ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
