Re: To re: Censorship/Freedom

[Guest guest]

Well lets work on a few things then...

1.Because something is the " law " it is good, impartial, " right " , whole etc???

If it is deemed to not be so then what. It is to be followed anyway??

A copyright in the broadest sense of the word is a protection of an authors

work. How was this abused? How much money did they lose over this being

reprinted here? I was referring to you as the censor not " copyright laws " .

The answer to number 2 you will have to work on. I personally have lttle

trouble with sharing. Either ideas, food, money or whatever if someone needs it

or desires it. As fars as if something should exsist or not is moot but it

works both ways ie. there should be censorship? Is this right?

And as far as you " respecting " the " law " that is fine. However in many, many

cases i do not. That is an easy one and you might gain some clarity from doing

the work on " laws " . What law is it that you respect? All? In this country or

all others as well. There is not one " law " you see as anti anything?

Lets try it: laws are important. Can i know this is true. Yes(i'll play devils

advocate)

What is your proof? Because with out them chaos will prevail. No ones work will

be respected. Some people will have what is theres taken away.

Can you absolutly know this is true? No.

How do you feel when you belive that. Scared

Can you see one reason for holding the thought that with out man made laws

society will crumble. No

Turnaround: Man made laws are equally not important. What is is. What will be

will be. With or without laws. Laws=story and control over external...

Hope this helps, john

> Christian wrote:

>

> >>Part of my story is the absolute hatred of censorship. Plus I belief if

> you reprint in a forum like this and credit where its do there's no problem.

> There sure as hell should not be.<<

>

> This is loaded with core beliefs. Would you like to work on them?

>

> 1. Respecting copyrights = censorship.

> 2. Giving credit where credit is due means you can take and use whatever you

> want.

> 3. There should not be censorship.

> 4. Copyright laws restrict my freedom.

>

> Can you find any others?

>

> BTW, my understanding is that a copyright means precisely that you may *not*

> reprint entire works in public fora, which this is, without permission of the

> author and/or publication. This understanding is based on many years of

> working in publishing and as a published author. It's as matter of legality,

> and I respect the law.

>

> Quoting from longer works is fine, and permissions are not needed unless a

> profit is to be made by using the quotation, as long as " credit is given

> where credit is due. "

>

> Love, Carol

>

>

[Guest guest]

,

As a practical matter, life is very simple when laws are obeyed...Having served

19 months in prison 12 years ago for selling ecstasy I can attest to this

fact...

[Guest guest]

Well intresting enough Nadeen, while in prision for selling ecstacy found

liberation. Had he followed the " laws " more than likely he would be on this

forum debating " personal beliefs " . Same situation different outcome. And if we

had " laws " that were not restricting to personal freedoms then you would not

have done time. But you are right. At least from the fundementalist religious

right point of view.

> ,

> As a practical matter, life is very simple when laws are obeyed...Having

served

> 19 months in prison 12 years ago for selling ecstasy I can attest to this

> fact...

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> Well lets work on a few things then...

>

> 1.Because something is the " law " it is good, impartial, " right " ,

whole etc???>>

No, not necessarily. That is not my core belief.

>>If it is deemed to not be so then what. It is to be followed

anyway??<<

Living lawfully is peaceful for me. I can't tell you or anyone else

what to do, of course.

>

>>A copyright in the broadest sense of the word is a protection of an

authors work. How was this abused? How much money did they lose over

this being reprinted here? I was referring to you as the censor not

" copyright laws " .<<

How am I a censor? You are free to read the article on the internet,

and even to print it out for your personal use, forward the link to

it to others, etc. as these options exist at the newspaper site

itself. And a copyrighted article, according to copyright laws, may

not be reprinted in its entirety without permission. I am simply

obeying the law and moderating this list as I see fit. I'm not

interested in censorship.

From the point of view of a writer: I have had my work reprinted on

the net without my permission. I have written to the places where

this has occurred and advised them of copyright law. In most cases I

allow the work to remain posted where it is for I do not see myself

as having been abused or cheated. And I continue to respect the laws

of copyright. One does not preclude the other.

>>The answer to number 2 you will have to work on. I personally have

lttle trouble with sharing. Either ideas, food, money or whatever if

someone needs it or desires it. As fars as if something should exsist

or not is moot but it works both ways ie. there should be censorship?

Is this right?<<

Censorship is what is...and I am not a censor. The information can

be

freely shared by directing people to the website or publication,

without reprinting it.

>

>> And as far as you " respecting " the " law " that is fine. However in

many, many cases i do not. That is an easy one and you might gain

some clarity from doing the work on " laws " . What law is it that you

respect? All? In this country or all others as well. There is not one

" law " you see as anti anything?<<

I respect the law, yes, even if I disagree with it in certain

instances (in the case of copyright law I'm in solid agreement). If

I break the law, I expect to be charged with breaking the law. That

doesn't mean I won't ever break the law if it goes against what I

believe is right, but I will do it with the awareness that laws exist.

You could be right about the " clarity " I could gain from working on

" laws. " I believe you might also benefit.

>

>> Lets try it: laws are important. Can i know this is true.

Yes(i'll

play devils advocate) What is your proof? Because with out them

chaos

will prevail. No ones work will be respected. Some people will have

what is theres taken away.

> Can you absolutly know this is true? No.

> How do you feel when you belive that. Scared

> Can you see one reason for holding the thought that with out man

made laws society will crumble. No

> Turnaround: Man made laws are equally not important. What is is.

What will be will be. With or without laws. Laws=story and control

over external...<<

If this is your work (it doesn't seem like it is), good. I did not

say laws were important. That was you.

Love, Carol

[Guest guest]

Im not sure where i said laws are important. They are uneeded is my belief.

ie.Do we need laws to keep society together? Can we know that with out them we

would collapse? We sure could empty the overcrowded jail's by eliminating many

laws against personal choice. Do you believe in the laws set down by the old

testament for instance and if so why or why not? Its not that big of a thing

just seemed like the hand of big brother.

> > Well lets work on a few things then...

> >

> > 1.Because something is the " law " it is good, impartial, " right " ,

> whole etc???>>

>

> No, not necessarily. That is not my core belief.

>

> >>If it is deemed to not be so then what. It is to be followed

> anyway??<<

>

> Living lawfully is peaceful for me. I can't tell you or anyone else

> what to do, of course.

> >

> >>A copyright in the broadest sense of the word is a protection of an

> authors work. How was this abused? How much money did they lose over

> this being reprinted here? I was referring to you as the censor not

> " copyright laws " .<<

>

> How am I a censor? You are free to read the article on the internet,

> and even to print it out for your personal use, forward the link to

> it to others, etc. as these options exist at the newspaper site

> itself. And a copyrighted article, according to copyright laws, may

> not be reprinted in its entirety without permission. I am simply

> obeying the law and moderating this list as I see fit. I'm not

> interested in censorship.

>

> From the point of view of a writer: I have had my work reprinted on

> the net without my permission. I have written to the places where

> this has occurred and advised them of copyright law. In most cases I

> allow the work to remain posted where it is for I do not see myself

> as having been abused or cheated. And I continue to respect the laws

> of copyright. One does not preclude the other.

>

>

> >>The answer to number 2 you will have to work on. I personally have

> lttle trouble with sharing. Either ideas, food, money or whatever if

> someone needs it or desires it. As fars as if something should exsist

> or not is moot but it works both ways ie. there should be censorship?

> Is this right?<<

>

> Censorship is what is...and I am not a censor. The information can

> be

> freely shared by directing people to the website or publication,

> without reprinting it.

> >

> >> And as far as you " respecting " the " law " that is fine. However in

> many, many cases i do not. That is an easy one and you might gain

> some clarity from doing the work on " laws " . What law is it that you

> respect? All? In this country or all others as well. There is not one

> " law " you see as anti anything?<<

>

> I respect the law, yes, even if I disagree with it in certain

> instances (in the case of copyright law I'm in solid agreement). If

> I break the law, I expect to be charged with breaking the law. That

> doesn't mean I won't ever break the law if it goes against what I

> believe is right, but I will do it with the awareness that laws exist.

>

> You could be right about the " clarity " I could gain from working on

> " laws. " I believe you might also benefit.

> >

> >> Lets try it: laws are important. Can i know this is true.

> Yes(i'll

> play devils advocate) What is your proof? Because with out them

> chaos

> will prevail. No ones work will be respected. Some people will have

> what is theres taken away.

> > Can you absolutly know this is true? No.

> > How do you feel when you belive that. Scared

> > Can you see one reason for holding the thought that with out man

> made laws society will crumble. No

> > Turnaround: Man made laws are equally not important. What is is.

> What will be will be. With or without laws. Laws=story and control

> over external...<<

>

> If this is your work (it doesn't seem like it is), good. I did not

> say laws were important. That was you.

>

> Love, Carol

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Um..My thought is you've tried to draw me into an argument with this post...If

I'm wrong, no biggie, if I'm right, no thanks...

B

Well intresting enough Nadeen, while in prision for selling ecstacy found

liberation. Had he followed the " laws " more than likely he would be on this

forum debating " personal beliefs " . Same situation different outcome. And if we

had " laws " that were not restricting to personal freedoms then you would not

have done time. But you are right. At least from the fundementalist religious

right point of view.

> ,

[Guest guest]

I might have been but your post seemed to do the same. I found it a

wonderfull Leela that you found prison to be one way and Nadeen found it

another. And you both went for the same thing. It never was about the drug

or prison. That is just a story. Good luck,

Re: To re: Censorship/Freedom

> Um..My thought is you've tried to draw me into an argument with this

post...If I'm wrong, no biggie, if I'm right, no thanks...

> B

> Well intresting enough Nadeen, while in prision for selling ecstacy

found

> liberation. Had he followed the " laws " more than likely he would be on

this

> forum debating " personal beliefs " . Same situation different outcome. And

if we

> had " laws " that were not restricting to personal freedoms then you would

not

> have done time. But you are right. At least from the fundementalist

religious

> right point of view.

> > ,

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

,

What's interesting is that you think you know how I found prison to be...As a

matter of fact it was during my time in prison that I first experienced the

tremendous joy of freedom from hope and fear...I had up until that point always

experienced anxiety about what I might become or not become, would I fulfill my

purpose, my destiny, or would I fail...In prison, I found one day, trust of the

inevitability of what is always right in front of me and all around

me...Standing in the cafeteria line among felons of all shapes and sizes, I felt

perhaps the most sublime bliss I have ever known...I experienced an utter

absence of anxiety in the knowledge that the future had not the slightest

relevance or reality to my existence...

Prison was a catapult for me like few things else that I have experienced..It

takes experiences where one experiences one's greatest fears, dies and yet lives

to experience such an absence of mind's ordinary compulsion to become...And

still, totally perfectly, the experience passed in time, more usual habits of

mind returned, I was released from prison, and ultimately, through inquiry I

learned to love and be grateful for the ordinary..I no longer long for the

exalted..It comes and it goes, perfectly, like every other thing....

, I will be very blunt and " un-spiritual " in my feedback to you.. Your way

of being almost tragically prevents one from making satisfying contact with

you....If you think it's worth it, you're making a mistake....

Re: To re: Censorship/Freedom

> Um..My thought is you've tried to draw me into an argument with this

post...If I'm wrong, no biggie, if I'm right, no thanks...

> B

> Well intresting enough Nadeen, while in prision for selling ecstacy

found

> liberation. Had he followed the " laws " more than likely he would be on

this

> forum debating " personal beliefs " . Same situation different outcome. And

if we

> had " laws " that were not restricting to personal freedoms then you would

not

> have done time. But you are right. At least from the fundementalist

religious

> right point of view.

> > ,

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

,

When I am in verbal battle, I try to cause the other to experience discomfort

just like anyone I suppose..But I don't do it by trying to inflict " new " hurt..I

do it by trying to force the other to experience the pain that I see them trying

not to experience..It's my " I'm more spiritual than you " way of arguing...

That's what I was doing in my two responses to you (and even the first one now

that I look)...I have a story about myself that I embraced my time in federal

prison to an extraordinary and " admirable " degree...Your words threatened that

story twice tonight and rather than tell you what was happening for me, in two

differerent way I played my " I'm a lot kinder and yet smarter and more aware

than you " persona....I've spent time tonight thinking that perhaps you too are

no stranger to using persona for a perceived advantage but that is none of my

business and I notice the discomfort of " insisting " that I dwell there...

Good luck to you...I wished you ill several times tonight and I no longer do....

[Guest guest]

Hehe. You wished me ill? It worked I am sorry to say i forgot all about

it. I hope you have forgiven me. I am as full of bullshit as the next

person. There is only 2 states of experience that i personally know about

and have experienced. No thought and thought. One is reality the other pure

illusion. Were just playacting out our roles. Mine is a particularly tough

role to step out of. Deeply i can say that i mean no harm. As the actor

however...

Re: To re: Censorship/Freedom

> ,

>

> When I am in verbal battle, I try to cause the other to experience

discomfort just like anyone I suppose..But I don't do it by trying to

inflict " new " hurt..I do it by trying to force the other to experience the

pain that I see them trying not to experience..It's my " I'm more spiritual

than you " way of arguing...

>

> That's what I was doing in my two responses to you (and even the first one

now that I look)...I have a story about myself that I embraced my time in

federal prison to an extraordinary and " admirable " degree...Your words

threatened that story twice tonight and rather than tell you what was

happening for me, in two differerent way I played my " I'm a lot kinder and

yet smarter and more aware than you " persona....I've spent time tonight

thinking that perhaps you too are no stranger to using persona for a

perceived advantage but that is none of my business and I notice the

discomfort of " insisting " that I dwell there...

>

> Good luck to you...I wished you ill several times tonight and I no longer

do....

>

>

>

>