From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M Kadie) Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: Re: First Amendment, Who Needs It? Date: 15 Jan 1994 13:41:45 -0500 Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL Lines: 44 Sender: pw@panix.com Approved: pw@panix.com Message-ID: References: <2go6lu$iic@news.ysu.edu> <2gv0ug$t6@bi.fish.com> jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews) writes: > If I hear this exaggeration once more on the Net I think I'll scream. >The Canadian law on pornography was developed after a long process of public >consultation. MacKinnon (sp?) probably spoke to the committees studying the >issue. But the law can in no way be interpreted as "adopting MacKinnon's >ideas". Here is how _Ms._ (May/June 1992) described MacKinnon's involvement: According to the _Ms._ article: "The ruling has the support of most women's groups in Canada, where the free-speech tradition is not a dominant as it is in the U.S.; as a result, feminist debate on pornorgaphy is less intense." Also: "'This is of world historic importance,' proclaimed Catherine A. MacKinnon, the University of Michigan law professor whose analysis of pornography and the law, co-authored with writer Andrea Dworkin, helped form the basis of LEAF's [Woman's Legal Education and Acuation Fund] argument. [...] > In any case, MacKinnon is in favour of civil, rather than criminal, laws >against pornography, basically because she doesn't trust the State to protect >what she sees as the rights of women. [...] I don't think this is the reason that MacKinnon favors civil over criminal laws. I believe her reason is that she knows (from experience) that criminal laws will be overturned in the U.S. by the courts. She hopes that civil laws will not be overturned. She is just being pragmatic. Civil laws require at least as much trust in government as criminal law. First, trust that the new statutory grounds for lawsuits are reasonable. Second, trust that the courts will be fair. Indeed, civil laws are in one way more dangerous to freedom than criminal laws. Crimes must be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt". Civil torts typically have a much lower standard of proof. - Carl -- Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu. Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu. This news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your article should be posted within several days. Rejections notified by email. Newsgroups: soc.feminism From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) Subject: Re: First Amendment, Who Needs It? Message-ID: <2hbs9b$gih@eff.org> Sender: tittle@netcom.com (Cindy Tittle Moore) Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation References: <2go6lu$iic@news.ysu.edu> <2gv0ug$t6@bi.fish.com> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 1994 13:50:00 GMT Approved: tittle@netcom.com Lines: 35 In article <2gv0ug$t6@bi.fish.com>, Jamie Andrews wrote: > If I hear this exaggeration once more on the Net I think >I'll scream. The Canadian law on pornography was developed after >a long process of public consultation. This is not quite true. The _Butler_ decision was a court decision, not the product of public hearings. > MacKinnon (sp?) probably >spoke to the committees studying the issue. But the law can in >no way be interpreted as "adopting MacKinnon's ideas". MacKinnon herself interprets it that way. See her discussion of Canadian law in ONLY WORDS. It is also incorrect to say that MacKinnon favors civil antiporn statutes rather than criminal ones. In fact, she favors both. --Mike -- Mike Godwin, (202) 347-5400 |"And walk among long dappled grass, mnemonic@eff.org | And pluck till time and times are done Electronic Frontier | The silver apples of the moon, Foundation | The golden apples of the sun." -- Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu. Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu. This news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your article should be posted within several days. Rejections notified by email.