On 3/12/06, dubphil <dubphil@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > That is correct behavior in my mind. First, before I invite you to m > > home I hopefully know something about you. You are a friend or close > > acquaintance. I don't invite you unless I'm already sure you are > > someone I want to spend an evening with. > > on the basis of which criteria ? Just personal choice. Do you invite every person you see on the street to dinner at your house? Of course not! We all 'self censor' our relationships. It doesn't mean we wouldn't enjoy an evening with some random person on the street. It's just not practical or even of interest to most people. > > what is following is not directly for you Mark as I always find very > valuable all your participations to this list. No offense will be taken! > > It is even dangerous to act by principles. I put in the same bag the > principles of free speech and the principles of censorship. To me both > can have the worst consequences. In fact you should be your own judge > and judge yourself before judging others. How could I not agree with that. It's very sensible. However I see it as 'personal'. I may choose to follow these ideas but I do not force others to follow them. While it may or may not be clear to all readers of a list like this around the world there are areas where we do not have free speech in America. One or two sensible ones are where we are possibly endangering people, such as shouting 'Fire!' in a crowded theater. Another would be where someone is inciting people to immediate violence. It's perfectly alright in America, to the best of my knowledge, to advocate for the overthrow of the government. It is not OK to advocate for the violent overthrow of the same government. > > On the other hand, there is something many people forget, is the > fabulous discover of Sigmund Freud called the "subconscious". He found > that the subconscious was acting as a censor. This censorship is quite > something vital for the human sanity (like murdering your father or > fucking your mother) we call this "Tabou" in French. Something that have > announced the end of many civilization was the breaking of the "Tabous". > In my mind, free speech looks like an open door to the breaking of > tabous. Here we disagree. Speech in my mind never breaks a taboo. (The U.S. spelling) Speech may make taboos more apparent. Bring them into the light of day. (metaphorically) Speech doesn't break taboos. People do. > > But no worry, I already think that our USA-like civilization is over... Here I am not sure of the meaning and I'd like to. Do you speak of the current USA? The current way France is operating? The world in general? Don't be too negative. The pendulum swings over time. That is certain. Certain people, such as George Bush and Osama bin Laden, will eventually go away and be replaced by new faces. It's our job to remain vocal about what we want when that happens. If we don't remain vocal and speak out then we get what we *didn't* ask for! That is often a much larger issue in my mind. Cheers, Mark > > Regards > > Philippe > >
