probably by the fact you're a man.
endorsing free access to this controversial material.
sociological impact is akin to digging your head in the sand.
of publishing online material is naive.
world.
controling access to it.
Le 14 janv. 11 à 10:49, Nuno Garcia a écrit :
I hope that in the end I do not sound like a Hulstler or Playboy
stockholder or subscriber (I am neither of these), but this is
really what I believe in, and probably my opinion is relevant for
the mailing list.
On 14 January 2011 03:00, Dwi Elfrida Martina S
hi rudy,
(snipped)
I agree with you, there is no country who already TOTALLY success
to do
process 'filter'. But, still we have to do our best to place
"pornography"
in good order, means there is certain regulation, term & condition.
so, we
can protect country from decreasing of morality:)
As I think we have made clear from previous statements, Morality
(as well as public order) ARE NOT an issue that concerns this
constituency and these considerations should therefore be left out
of discussion and encouraged to be left of all the discussions in
ICANN.
(long parenthesis: I'm sure Dwi was formulating a wish for its own
country, and it this case, it's perfectly ok to do so. I must
recall the list that Morality is an extremelly complex issue, much
more than paedophilia, which is generally defined as crime in most
western and southern countries, but, in contrast, it is indulged by
some other countries (e.g. asian), and was not at all a crime
before 1950 in most of the countries I know. When these issues dig
deep in our cultural backgrounds and in our religious or belief
points of view, it is best to rely on the system of values that we
know is transversal to all Mankind and are best described in the
Charter for Human Rights, that I think best summarizes the values
we must guide for. End of long parenthesis.)
In conclusion, and having the Charter for Human Rights as a working
bench, I say that the arguments for discussing this or that issue
(but not for the .XXX which is long due), should never be issues on
liberty, or censorship, let alone competencies or policies for
governments.
We, as an informed and knowledgeable community, must put forward
our opinions having in view the larger and greater good of our
fellow Internet users, oblivious to where they sit in working days
or in holidays or in Holy days. All of us deserve an Internet that
_does_ _not_ _limit_ our rights as persons and promotes the values
engraved in the Charter for Human Rights.
We cannot say much regarding the different civilizational issues of
different countries. For me, I know that in my country we still
have a long way to go. But this is my belief, probably some of my
fellow citizens do not agree with me, and therefore this is not an
issue to discuss here.
I have the greatest of respects for all cultures, religions and
civilizations, and I try hard to not let my personal beliefs to
stand in the way of my professional beliefs, so I expect others to
do the same.
Of course, I stand perfectly aware that, as Ortega y Gasset once
said, I am myself and my circumstance, and thus my points of view
will always be tainted by the fact that I was born and raised here.
So to conclude, for me the purpose of this constituency is not to
place pornography or capitalism or comunism or _______ (fill in
with you word of choice) into order.
It is to make sure that we provide ICANN with valueable and wise
opinions. And we should do our best to do so. For our own good and
the benefit of all mankind.
I leave you all with two thoughts, one from Ben Franklin who once
said "He who gives up a liberty to achieve a temporary security
deserves neither and will loose both" (and there are plenty of
historical examples of this), and the other, from a greek
philosopher whose name I cannot remember "the best way to prevent a
damage to society is to educate the children".
With my personal and sincere excuses if my points of view have
offended anyone (was not my intention), I wish you all a nice week
end,
Nuno Garcia