From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V11 #206 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Thursday, June 27 2002 Volume 11 : Number 206 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Jet Boy Jet Girl Jet Feg [Ken Weingold ] Fwd: Herbie's lost branches [Mike Swedene ] Re: SOLARIS ["Eugene Hopstetter, Jr." ] One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY ["Rex.Broome" ] RE: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY ["Jason Brown (Echo Services ] time and again ["ross taylor" ] Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY ["FS Thomas" ] RE: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY ["Rex.Broome" ] RE: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY ["Jonathan Fetter" ] Re: Who has OS X? [Steve Talkowski ] Re: time takes a cigarette and it won't wait for me ["Mike Wells" ] More REAP ["Maximilian Lang" ] heathe(n/r) ["Andrew D. Simchik" ] Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY [Eleanore Adams ] Re: REAP [" FS Thomas" ] Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY [" FS Thomas" Subject: Jet Boy Jet Girl Jet Feg On Thu, Jun 27, 2002, ross taylor wrote: > Someone very kindly traded me the 1st two Capt. > Sensible solo records, for which Robyn co-wrote > many of the songs (& played some guitar & > chatted between tracks). Wow, I had no idea that Captain and Robyn worked together. Now I will have to see my Captain CDs when I get home and see if Robyn is on them. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 09:24:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Mike Swedene Subject: Fwd: Herbie's lost branches still have not heard from these branches.... "begun these clone wars have" Herbie Note: forwarded message attached. ===== - --------------------------------------------- View my Websight & CDR Trade page at: http://midy.topcities.com/ _____________________________________________ Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: pulp_101@yahoo.com via web10406.mail.yahoo.com; 14 Jun 2002 09:45:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Track: 1: 40 Return-Path: Received: from jane.smoe.org (EHLO smoe.org) (66.89.201.78) by mta570.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Jun 2002 09:45:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smoe.org (ident-user@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smoe.org (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g5EGjNG7029422 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 12:45:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by smoe.org (8.12.2/8.12.2/Submit) id g5EGjN1g029417 for fegmaniax-outgoing; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 12:45:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from web10401.mail.yahoo.com (web10401.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.130.93]) by smoe.org (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g5EGjJG7029319 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 12:45:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [24.48.112.91] by web10401.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 09:45:19 PDT Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 09:45:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Mike Swedene Subject: Herbie's lost branches To: 2 For The Price of 1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-fegmaniax@smoe.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Mike Swedene Content-Length: 540 PAGING: Branch H: Peter Palmer PlPalmer@popd.ix.netcom.com Branch I: Aaron Lowe aaron@hollowstreets.net I have not heard from you two. I get bounced back mail from Peter, but I have the cds for the tree. Please email me and let me know what is going on. Herbie np -> "Fairplay" Hitchcock ===== - --------------------------------------------- View my Websight & CDR Trade page at: http://midy.topcities.com/ _____________________________________________ Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 10:50:20 -0700 (PDT) From: "Eugene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: Re: SOLARIS > From: Steve Talkowski > > Funny you should mention this, the remake was just being discussed on a > 3d industry list i'm subbed to... I cannot wait for Soderberg's Solaris. I didn't enjoy the original film, but I attribute that to the fact that I saw it on a million-year old VHS tape in pan-n-scan, so it wasn't too engaging. Soderberg has said (in an interview with Film Threat, IIRC) that he liked it because it wasn't a *hardware-based* sci-fi film so much as a *character-based* sci-fi film (to wit, "a cross between '2001' and 'Last Tango in Paris'). And considering the magic Soderberg can get out of any actor (shit, he actually made me respect Julia Roberts) Solaris is gonna rool. I expect it'll play to about five or ten people and be in the theaters for about two days, though. And he'd better produce "Son of Schizopolis" after "Solaris" or I'm gonna be seriously pissed. Smell sign? Beef diaper. NP: Jim O'Rourke, "Eureka" . Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 11:00:16 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY From: R Edward Poole >>oh, and please let's not start calling each other names now that I've >>mentioned a political issue, because I'll feel really really guilty for >>setting a match to that fire In the same spirt, a minor rant: the Supreme Court yesterday struck down the phrase "under God" in the pledge of allegaiance as inconstitutional. Just good common sense, really, but you could feel the firestorm brewing. So today the Senate opens up with a big bi-partisan showing to recite the pledge with the offending line intact, and makes a big stink about how we are "one nation, under God, and proud of it" etc. So congratulations to them. My government has *finally* found a way to *officially* disenfranchise me, a straight white male of all things, for my beliefs, or lack thereof as it happens. Chalk it up to the creeping post-9/11 anti-atheism... remember the "day of prayer", and all the talk of how "everyone of all faiths" (usuallly meaning just the Abrahamic ones but occasionally tossing in Buddhism for good measure) stood together against evil and all that? Nice to know I rate lower than a murderous zealot. I spent the "day of prayer" listening to New York rock & roll, which was the most "religious" thing I coould think of. Speaking of which, the new Sonic Youth is actually quite good, although not quite the "return to form" touted by the critics... that's partially sympathetic post-9/11 windfall as well, but mostly due to the fact that they've been gradually returning to form over the last few, critically-neglected records anyway. Still not a genuinely "bad" record in their catalog. Just to back up the rant with a little positivi-tee. - -Rex (BTW, I totally like and respect religious folks, but how about a little love?) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 10:57:01 -0700 From: "Jason Brown (Echo Services Inc)" Subject: RE: SOLARIS I expect Soderbergh's Solaris to be a bit more fast paced than Tarkovsky's. That said it could still be a very slow film. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 11:05:04 -0700 From: "Jason Brown (Echo Services Inc)" Subject: RE: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY > In the same spirt, a minor rant: the Supreme Court yesterday struck down > phrase "under God" in the pledge of allegaiance as inconstitutional. Just > good common sense, really, but you could feel the firestorm brewing. So > today the Senate opens up with a big bi-partisan showing to recite the > pledge with the offending line intact, and makes a big stink about how we > are "one nation, under God, and proud of it" etc. Actually it was the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that did that. The Supreme Court just said that its ok for states to pay tution for students to religious private schools, so I wouldn't necessarily expect them to back up the ninth Circuit. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:40:35 -0400 From: "ross taylor" Subject: time and again A Brief History of Time-- I didn't read the book, but it was a great movie. A friend of mine says the proof that time travel is impossible is that we are not swamped with time-travelling graduate students. It seems to me tho, that if there are an infinite number of universes/time-streams, only a very small subset of them would be ones that could be *imagined* by graduate students (particularly students who could get their study funded), so we'd have a very good chance of being in a study-free universe. So did J.L. Borges come up w/ this idea first, or was it bouncing around among philosophers & scientists before him? I think there's an expert on this list ... Surely one of the most devolved versions of the theory was Quest Cross Time by Andre Norton, which I read in youth, it had its heros gadding about this way & that across alternate universes, looking out the portals & watching things shift as they travelled. - --- Solaris-- Actually I liked that. Don't know any other Tarkovsky[sp?], any suggestions? (But there is also the profound, serene experience of watching the uneven sheen of wet paint gradually turning to regular gloss ...) - --- Enjoyed your rant, Mr. Poole. Now, did you say your specialty was Blue Sky law? - --- Ross Taylor "little old lady got mutilated just last night - --Brian DePalma again" Werewolves of Los Angeles Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:46:07 -0400 From: "FS Thomas" Subject: Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rex.Broome" > (BTW, I totally like and respect religious folks, but how about a little > love?) I'm pretty far from what you could refer to as religious (a big 'thank you' to the Catholic Church, the Crusades/Inquisition, and the likes of Jimmy Falwell and Jim and Tammy Fay for that one). I was born into a Protestant household. Under my parent's insistence I went through the process of joining the church and with the exception of the odd holiday, wedding, or memorial service, rarely enter the joint. I don't appreciate the institutions of organized religion. I don't like what they're capable of and the fervor with which people can find themselves in the name of their God (or in the face of other's God(s)). While I find the Saints and the mysteries fascinating and look on Westminster, Notre Dame and the Pyramids and find them mind blowing--not only for their creativity but the sheer beauty of the work. It's the other side of the coin that I find ugly. The greed, the corruption, and the biblical wall they hide behind. From what I understand of the definition of the term I would describe myself as an agnostic. One who can fully understand the atheist point of view. While in my heart of hearts I'm sure that we're here as the result of a cosmic fluke (and one that's certain to have happened before in some far-flung reach of the universe), I can understand religion. The religions of the world are the accumulated teachings of the wise. I've read the Bible. I've read Confucius and parts of the Koran. They're, by and large good books. There's strong points in each and there's fundamental flaws in each. They are at heart good outlines for a way of life. An outline, not an instruction manual. The bottom line is, though, they're BOOKS. You could just as well accept the Yellow Pages as your scripture if you wanted to and it wouldn't be any less grounded as saying that the King James is the only book for you. If you can't tackle the idea that we're here as a turn of luck and that when we cease getting up in the morning that that is indeed IT, without passing Go and collecting your two hundred clams, then turning to a moldy book adopting it as your Absolute Truths might make you sleep a bit better. I digress. The fundamental flaw with the case brought before the court is the following (quoted straight from page 4 (9111) of the Pledge Ruling) - ---quote--- Newdow does not allege that his daughter's teacher or the school district requires his daughter to participate in reciting the Pledge. Rather, he claims that his daughter is injured when she is compelled to "watch and listen as her state-employed teacher in her state-run school leads her classmates in a ritual proclaiming that there is a God, and that our's [sic] is 'one nation under God.'" - ---quote--- Injury? Injury?!? There's the matter of freedom of speech, isn't there? Unpopular opinions, even though by definition disliked, are still protected under the Constitution, just as this separation. Were I still in grade school I would like to think that while I'm tearing out my hair on a chem test, that I could say, "god god god god god" and not get the boot because the atheist kid two seats back takes offense. Does he/she have to feel compelled to join me in my chant? No, I'm not asking them to; I'm asking is for the right to say it myself. - -f. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:02:00 -0400 From: Stewart Russell Subject: Re: time and again ross taylor wrote: > > So did J.L. Borges come up w/ this idea first, > or was it bouncing around among philosophers > & scientists before him? it crops up a couple of times in John Wyndham's collection "The Seeds of Time", in the stories "Chronoclasm" (where a grad student does use a time machine illictly) and "Pawley's Peepholes" (where tourists from the future cause chaos in a small town). These were published in 1956. Having just read this and "The Kraken Wakes", I'm reminded of just how good Wyndham is. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 12:18:17 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: RE: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY I would agree that the court case that resulted in the ruling is more or less trivial and the ruling doesn't necessarily follow from it. But the results have nothing to do with free speech... nobody's right to say *anything* has been infringed, what's happened is that language has been removed from something that's supposed to be an official representation of a nation that supposedly favors no faith over another. So that's as it should be. The "under God" bit was added to the pledge in the days of Red-baiting and blacklisting, as a response to "Godless Communism", so if we want to discuss limiting civil rights, hey, there's a good starting point. What irked me wasn't any of that, but the big stink the Senate made, which was a crass rhetorical move meant to inocculate all the individuals present from charges of atheism or anti-religiosity or whatever. A politician's religious affiliation realistically shouldn't affect his or her abilities as a public servant, but their polling says otherwise, so there you go. Blechhh. >>Were I still in grade >>school I would like to think that while I'm tearing out my hair on a chem >>test, that I could say, "god god god god god" and not get the boot because >>the atheist kid two seats back takes offense. Lemme tell ya, nothing resembling atheism plays in grade school. Most folks have gotten beyond religion through a fair amount of intellectual searching. I don't find the situation you describe too probable... more likely you'd be taken to task by the fundamentalist kid for taking the name of the Lord in vain. Don't mean to make a big deal about it, nor do I have any strong moral outrage. I mean, my life is not deeply impacted; I just found it a distasteful display and hadn't heard that point of view expressed anywhere yet. Peace, Rex ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:18:50 -0400 From: Stewart Russell Subject: Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY FS Thomas wrote: > > ... the right to say it myself. It's still a breach of the peace in England (and may still be in Scotland, too). They thought about repealing the blasphemy laws last year, but (AFAIR) they never got round to it. No-one's been prosecuted for it for a very long time. It's ironic that England has an established church, but saying the name of its CEO is an offence ;-) Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:24:42 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY On Thu, Jun 27, 2002, Stewart Russell wrote: > It's ironic that England has an established church, but saying the name > of its CEO is an offence ;-) But I'm glad England DOES have one, since Eddie Izzard has a great bit on it. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:24:53 -0400 From: "FS Thomas" Subject: Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart Russell" > > It's ironic that England has an established church, but saying the name > of its CEO is an offence ;-) I haven't had a good laugh all day, Stewart! Thank you! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:29:12 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Who has OS X? Sorry to be so OT here, but anyone here running Mac OS X 10.1.5? I need a very small file from it. Itprobably can be from an earlier 10.1, though. Thanks. - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:40:24 -0400 (EDT) From: "Jonathan Fetter" Subject: RE: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY > Don't mean to make a big deal about it, nor do I have any strong moral > outrage. I mean, my life is not deeply impacted; I just found it a > distasteful display and hadn't heard that point of view expressed anywhere > yet. It's not that big a deal, really, but the whole thing pisses me off in two ways. The first is as you said, the whole moral outrage by the far- right and the meek voter-fearing Dems in Congress, makes me sick. Complete knee-jerk reaction. The second is that the outrage on the part of the right will result in more support for groups with conservative agendas, which means more contributions and clout to for them to fight for their side on issues more important than the pledge, like teaching Creationsim in public schools. I support the court-ruling, but I'd gladly put the "under God" back in for a trade to protect science education from those idiots. The SF ruling is just small-ball. I guess the next big thing will be loyalty pledges. I believe I've heard that teachers are required to lead students in the pledge. When I was student teaching, I'd either remain quiet during the god bit, or mumble "underpants" to myself. Jon ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 12:56:48 -0700 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: RE: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY Jon sez: >>more contributions and clout to for them to >>fight for their side on issues more important than the pledge, like >>teaching Creationsim in public schools. I support the court-ruling, but >>I'd gladly put the "under God" back in for a trade to protect science >>education Yeah, I'm pretty much in accord with that; I just kinda wish the whole thing had never happened, so ultimately it's phooey on the plaintiffs. Check it out, if you have to teach Genesis in science class, doesn't it follow that you would have to give equal time to all the other Creation Myths? Brace you kids for a two-week biology unit about how the world is cruising the cosmic seas on the back of a turtle. - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:03:35 -0400 From: Stewart Russell Subject: Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY Rex.Broome wrote: > > Brace you kids for a two-week biology unit about how the world is > cruising the cosmic seas on the back of a turtle. could be a neat way of sneaking sex education into class; aren't there several Amazon-basin religions which involve deities shagging things into life? If not, there should be. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 22:35:14 +0200 From: Sebastian Hagedorn Subject: Re: time and again - -- ross taylor is rumored to have mumbled on Donnerstag, 27. Juni 2002 14:40 Uhr -0400 regarding time and again: > > Solaris-- > > Actually I liked that. Don't know any other > Tarkovsky[sp?], any suggestions? Stalker. I've also seen "The Sacrifice", but it was such a long time ago... - -- Sebastian Hagedorn Ehrenfeldg|rtel 156, 50823 Kvln, Germany http://www.spinfo.uni-koeln.de/~hgd/ "Being just contaminates the void" - Robyn Hitchcock ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 13:53:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Steve Talkowski Subject: Re: Who has OS X? On Thursday, 27, 2002, at 03:29PM, Ken Weingold wrote: >Sorry to be so OT here, but anyone here running Mac OS X 10.1.5? I >need a very small file from it. Itprobably can be from an earlier >10.1, though. I'm running it on my 500Mhz TiBook, but don't have it with me currently. eMail me tonight and I'll be happy to send the file you need. - -Steve ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:42:23 -0500 From: "Mike Wells" Subject: Re: time takes a cigarette and it won't wait for me Ross: > It seems to me tho, that if there are an infinite > number of universes/time-streams, only a very > small subset of them would be ones that could > be *imagined* by graduate students (particularly > students who could get their study funded), so > we'd have a very good chance of being in a > study-free universe. Actually we're in a relatively underfunded universe, which is why the really good grad students don't imagine being here at all. They're all down pub watching the Cup. Speaking of which: Stewart, I see your buddy Hugh Dallas will be the fourth official for the final Sunday. Let's hope Collina doesn't need any help. Me, I'm picking Brazil to win 117 - 0...don't ask me why, they just seem to be on a roll right now. I think they should have shaved Petit's paintbrush ponytail off and given him the Ronaldo space-alien doo for bitching and moaning so much after the frogs got bounced. And Sebastian, I'm claiming dibs on staying with you in 2006. Michael "that Ronaldo's rather useful" Wells ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 18:19:11 -0400 From: "Maximilian Lang" Subject: REAP John Entwistle. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 19:07:55 -0400 From: "Maximilian Lang" Subject: More REAP Timothy White. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 18:06:30 -0700 (PDT) From: "Andrew D. Simchik" Subject: heathe(n/r) I've always hated the "multiple universes" theory myself, at least the version where theoretically there is a version of me who is EXACTLY the same except I have blond hair, and there are versions of me with every possible gradation of color between brown and blond, and so on. It seems like a fairly silly consequence of physics, if true, and the idea that one could in science fiction "travel" between parallel universes has always seemed contrived to me. Oh well. > From: "Kenneth Johnson" > > Since you're wondering, I listened to 2 random tracks > twice each and was > bored stone shitless that shite was all there was. I'm listening to it in my car again and I still love it. The last Bowie album I put on for pleasure as opposed to "it's Bowie, must give it a chance" was _Let's Dance_, and even that never makes my playlist these days. So this is impressive, to me. Is it on par with his 70s work? With _Low_, _Ziggy_, _Hunky Dory_, _Station to Station_, maybe not as such. With _Diamond Dogs_, sure, no problem. Again, my opinion. It's not incredible, just a pleasurable listen from someone who seemed determined to make nothing but abrasive and meaningless records for the rest of his career. It sounds better as a whole album than in parts, I think. The cover of "Cactus" is not so hot compared to the original, though. > Perhaps Boowee (as George Clinton would pronounce it) has > missed his true > calling. Can anyone say Labyrinth 2? _Labyrinth_: now there was a shite film, Bowie or no Bowie. I realize I'm the only human on the planet who feels this way, but I really did despise just about every labored, annoying moment of that allegedly charming fantasy. > From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey > > Still haven't seen it, but...it just occurred to me that > William H. Macy > would make a good, uh, Dick protagonist (gotta be careful > w/that phrase > around here), probably one of Dick's radio repairmen-type > characters... You're so right. He's perfect. Drew ===== - -- Andrew D. Simchik, adsimchik@yahoo.com Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 18:20:54 -0700 From: Eleanore Adams Subject: Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY Someone probably already stated this - this is not exactly a matter of free speech. It could be considered more akin to a moment of prayer or the 10 commandments in public schools - an endorsement by the state of "one god", since it is lead by the teacher and expected to be repeated by all students. You are free to say it on your own, like "god god god god" at the exam, but for the state to make you say it..... that is the injury. It is unconstitutional to force kids to pray or even have a moment of silent prayer - in a public school. Now some may not find the two analogous........but some may. I personally do not want to pledge to any flag or god or country. and there certainly is not liberty and justice for all in this country. just look at death row and the mistakes made there. and there still is not a stay on all executions....... eleanore > Injury? Injury?!? There's the matter of freedom of speech, isn't > there? > Unpopular opinions, even though by definition disliked, are still > protected > under the Constitution, just as this separation. Were I still in grade > school I would like to think that while I'm tearing out my hair on a > chem > test, that I could say, "god god god god god" and not get the boot > because > the atheist kid two seats back takes offense. Does he/she have to feel > compelled to join me in my chant? No, I'm not asking them to; I'm > asking is > for the right to say it myself. > > -f. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 18:30:31 -0700 From: Eleanore Adams Subject: thanks for the sanity I am soooo glad to open my e-mail and hear sanity. I am right now studying for the Bar, engrossed in constitutional law and corporations, watching the news and Bush and just fuming, thinking that this country is going to hell in a handbag (if that is still a phrase) that someday the secret police are going to bust my door down because the 4th and 5th amendment don't apply to "detainees" even if they are citizens with no military background, who refuse to say "under god". At least there are some sane people around here still..... eleanore ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 21:38:40 -0400 From: " FS Thomas" Subject: Re: REAP - ----- Original Message ----- > John Entwistle. Four days away from a tour. I saw the Quadrophenia show probably three years ago and was absolutely enthralled. To quote Neil, "Wow. I'm depressed." - -f. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 21:36:54 -0400 From: " FS Thomas" Subject: Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eleanore Adams" To: "FS Thomas" Cc: "Rex.Broome" ; Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 9:20 PM Subject: Re: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY > Someone probably already stated this - this is not exactly a matter of > free speech. It could be considered more akin to a moment of prayer or > the 10 commandments in public schools - an endorsement by the state of > "one god", since it is lead by the teacher and expected to be repeated > by all students. It says right in the court document that he (the father) "does not allege that his daughter's teacher or the school district requires his daughter to participate in reciting the Pledge" so I don't see what's the big deal. If I were Jewish and they want to put a Christmas tree in the White House then I don't see as though I would have a problem with it. I do think Mr. Newdow does, though. It's a matter of personal descretion. It's akin to television or the radio. If you're being subjected to crap then either tune it out or change the channel, but don't impugne on other's right to the crap. If there weren't a market for it, it wouldn't be broadcast. - -f. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 21:58:38 -0400 From: "Poole, R. Edward" Subject: RE: One Nation, Somewhat Divisible / New SY Eleanore cogently noted: >Someone probably already stated this - this is not exactly a matter of >free speech. . . . You are free to say it on your own, like "god god god >god" at the exam, but for the state to make you say it..... that is the >injury. It is unconstitutional to force kids to pray or even have a >moment of silent prayer - in a public school. Now some may not find the >two analogous........but some may. Absolutely. Amen to that (whoops!). There are few constitutional issues more misunderstood than the 1st amendment -- at least among the widely known ones. (anyone care to debate me on the meaning of the 9th amendment? here's my position: it's like when you say you are going to do something, then 10 seconds later you insist "really really really, I mean it, I'm gonna do it, really!" -- here the framers were saying -- this national gov't is one of limited, delegated powers. the states retain those powers not delegated to the congress. here's this bill of rights saying all the things the nat'l gov't may not do. and, oh yeah, this 9th amendment thing? in case we left anything out when we were saying that the federal government can't do this or that, that don't mean they can do it. really. if we didn't give 'em the power, they can't do it. really.) anyway, "free speech." that's where the whole problem starts. the logical inference from those two little words is that we're talking about a positive freedom, an entitlement to do something. and if my employers says I can't scream "f*ck off!" during staff meetings, hey, dude, he's trampling my freedom of speech! all that P.C. froth against hurtful-words-and-stigmatizing-stereotyping -- lay off me, will ya? isn't there such a thing as free speech no more? If I want to use "offensive" words to describe gays or Latinos or the elderly or right wing nuts, you can't stop me man! "free speech" "free speech" "free speech" "free speech!" ummmm, no. check the text: "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . ." OK, key words: CONGRESS. NO LAW. ABRIDGING. like pretty much everything else in the american lexicon of freedom, that there's a negative freedom (albeit one that sounds very much like a positive one). CONGRESS (not your neighbor or employer or the ticket taker at Giants Stadium) ain't allowed to make laws the prohibit, punish, regulate (for the most part), the exercise of speech. It's a freedom FROM a government that might otherwise enforce a required set of beliefs or punish those who criticize the prevailing opinions of the day or, especially, the way the government is operated. That doesn't mean that any time you want to express yourself, no matter how vile, rude, immoral, offensive, prurient, humorous, incisive, or caustic your speech may be, that the rest of the world has got to get out of the way or just put up with it, because you are exercising your "free speech" rights! Sorry, the rest of us are entitled to tell you to shut the f*ck up if we don't wanna hear it. (not that I feel that way about anything you've said; I don't). What we CANNOT do, is go to Mr. Congressman and get him to pass a law entitled "The Ferris S. Thomas Must Keep His Opinions To Himself Act" (even if it weren't a bill of attainder). OK, I'll even tie this in to the issue at hand: The critical, perhaps even more important, corollary to the negative freedom of speech that prevents the government from telling you what you cannot say, is the principle that the government impose burdens, penalties, inhibitions on your right to NOT talk. Gov't may not require adherence to a given set of beliefs, nor force anyone to say something in particular (except as a condition for receiving a gov't benefit -- say, make you swear to defend the US constitution before swearing you in as a new associate justice of the supreme court -- which is a dodgy area of 1st amendment law in any event). And that's what this is about. A principled, committed atheist, who objects to being coerced by a government institution into professing a belief that she does not hold, and who suffers consequences if she exercises her right to keep quiet (esp. in this context, in this post-911 time of heightened patriotism and, in this context more importantly, this atmosphere of heightened distrust for anyone who does not show "enough" patriotism or who dares criticize the gov't, yada yada) -- it is an easy case that follows automatically from prior cases, and I'm surprised it's never come up before. anyway, I'll stop. i'm sure you all hit delete the moment you saw my name next to reams of text. I do tend to ramble on a bit. > Injury? Injury?!? There's the matter of freedom of speech, isn't > there? > Unpopular opinions, even though by definition disliked, are still > protected > under the Constitution, just as this separation. Were I still in grade > school I would like to think that while I'm tearing out my hair on a > chem > test, that I could say, "god god god god god" and not get the boot > because > the atheist kid two seats back takes offense. Does he/she have to feel > compelled to join me in my chant? No, I'm not asking them to; I'm > asking is > for the right to say it myself. > > -f. ============================================================================This e-mail message and any attached files are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the addressee(s) named above. This communication may contain material protected by attorney-client, work product, or other privileges. If you are not the intended recipient or person responsible for delivering this confidential communication to the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, copying, or other distribution of this e-mail message and any attached files is strictly prohibited. If you have received this confidential communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail message and permanently delete the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to postmaster@dsmo.com Dickstein Shapiro Morin & Oshinsky LLP http://www.legalinnovators.com ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V11 #206 ********************************