Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"

[Against Moderation <antimod@nym.alias.net>]

Dave Hayes <dave@kachina.jetcafe.org> writes:

> Don't you get it? Real censorship issues do not arise until someone
> rocks the boat. It takes someone to rock the boat to make you aware
> of your own prejudices of that nature. If it takes attacking
> homosexuals and pissing them off enough to make them show their
> true colors and begin censorship...so be it. Why be civil when that
> civility serves to hide that which is ultimately against free speech?
> 
> You'll find those of us who -truly- want free speech are extremely
> good at ignoring what we don't like.

Perhaps I did not make myself clear.  I never suggested Dr. Grubor's
views should be suppressed.  Not only do I believe he has every right
to express them, I also believe (as I explained) that I think there is
value in inducing censorship as he has, so as to get people's
censorious tendencies out in the open where they can be fought.

However, Dr. Grubor is no advocate of free speech (though I'm sure he
thinks he is).  If Dr. Grubor had his way, he would severely restrict
the rights of gay people to express themselves on Usenet.  Advocates
of free speech must truly tolerate all speech, even that which they
find strongly unpleasant or disturbing.

My point was therefore that Dr. Grubor would do better to say
"Exterminate all faggots" than "Exterminate all faggots in the name of
free speech," and that those of us who truly support freedom of speech
would do well to distance ourselves from Dr. Grubor, while still fully
supporting his right to express his opinions.