Loren Pechtel

A complete notion of where it came from does *NOTHING* about copyright. Nor does the fact that others have copied it make it legal to copy.

Jat

I thought that it was ok to post something as long as you gave proper credit for it and didn't claim it as your own? That is what copyright means to me.

Throbert McGee

As a homosexual, I feel qualified to answer this one. For me, frankly, it's not that I prefer ''members of the same gender as myself''; it's that I prefer M-E-N. Since I was a young boy, I have enjoyed looking at broad shoulders and hairy chests and muscular legs and stubbled jaws and thick eyebrows and, of course, dicks and balls. Now, it happens that I've grown up to be, more or less, the sort of man that I idolized from boyhood, but it's still more about an attraction to maleness rather than to ''sameness.''

And incidentally, if you were to show me pictures of two women, one soft and curvaceous and very feminine, and the other athletic and tomboyish (but pretty), and you asked me which I'd be drawn to socially, I'd pick the tomboy in a nanosecond.

With that point out of the way, I am at a loss to imagine on what grounds someone would say that it would be immoral for me to get naked with another man who finds that there is something achingly beautiful about a masculine body, so that we can give joy and satisfaction to each other.

Howay the Toon

You have repeatedly stated that Homosexuality is "Bad" my your moral standard. How is that not a comment about the ethics of homosexuality. the issue of the genetic basis of homosexuality is a complicated one which is a much to do with emryonic development as it is to do with Genetic determinism and in any case has zilch to do with the rightness, wrongness of homosexuality. Or with the issue of civil rights for homosexuals.



Ok how about if I believe that all those with an internet pseudonym beginning with U should be hunted down and shot according to my moral standard. Do you still feel that this is perfectly OK for me to believe and argue for without any justification.


The thread was about whether homosexuals should be allowed to marry. Your argument was that they shouldn't because homosexuality is bad according to your moral standard.

How is that not an argument about the ethics of homosexuality

Jat

Careful or you'll make him gay.

Loren Pechtel

Nope. That avoids a charge of plagarism but not copyright violation. After all, otherwise warez sites would be legal! They don't claim the stuff is their own, after all.

It's a widely abused law but it's the law. There have even been lawsuits about usenet posts of copywritten material--the Scientologists went ape over their books being posted. The result led to the demise of the anon.penet.fi anonymous remailer.

Normally it's not an issue for individuals, but for an organization like the Secular Web to permit it is another matter. Since the boards are moderated they have some accountability for what's posted.

Anything beyond what's covered by fair use (basically, quoting as needed for commentary purposes) unfortunately has to be removed. We try to find a copy on the internet to link to but there isn't always a copy out there or it might be behind something that fouls up Google.

Jat

Originally posted by Loren Pechtel

Nope. That avoids a charge of plagarism but not copyright violation. After all, otherwise warez sites would be legal! They don't claim the stuff is their own, after all.

As far as I'm concerned a software pirate is one who makes a profit on the warez.

It's a widely abused law but it's the law. There have even been lawsuits about usenet posts of copywritten material--the Scientologists went ape over their books being posted. The result led to the demise of the anon.penet.fi anonymous remailer.

They'd sue ANYONE who tries to expose their "religion" for what it is. Any "real" religion wouldn't mind having its "holy texts" spread around as much as possible.

Normally it's not an issue for individuals, but for an organization like the Secular Web to permit it is another matter. Since the boards are moderated they have some accountability for what's posted.

Anything beyond what's covered by fair use (basically, quoting as needed for commentary purposes) unfortunately has to be removed. We try to find a copy on the internet to link to but there isn't always a copy out there or it might be behind something that fouls up Google.

I would have just put the URL if I had it, but I got the article around 10 years ago and not from the net. In the text file I have it has listed at the top many usenet channels.

Loren Pechtel

Originally posted by Jat
As far as I'm concerned a software pirate is one who makes a profit on the warez.

It's still piracy if you don't make a profit, though.

They'd sue ANYONE who tries to expose their "religion" for what it is. Any "real" religion wouldn't mind having its "holy texts" spread around as much as possible.

True, but without a valid reason they wouldn't get very far in court.

I would have just put the URL if I had it, but I got the article around 10 years ago and not from the net. In the text file I have it has listed at the top many usenet channels.

I understand--I would have left it if I could. If it's all over the place on usenet, find a page in one of the places that archives usenet posts and post a link to that.

Jolimont

What about childless hetero couples? Should heterosexuals who do not wish to have children be allowed to marry? I think that's a weak argument. Besides, children are no better off whether the parents are married or not, it's purely a question of commitment from the partners and family athmosphere, the piece of paper doesn't matter.

Colander of Truth

:notworthy :notworthy