|
|
 | | From: | Norman Miller | | Subject: | Re: Road Runner drops the ball on the weekend | | Date: | Wed, 4 Jan 2005 21:49:04 GMT |
|
|
 | of the laws governing the civilized
world in our present day will show that any attempt to ban any kind of
creative work ultimately and absolutely fails because our civilized laws
dating back to 1066 require that there be a demonstrable danger of
physical harm before the law can take my action. Certainly, the near
universal repulsion that heteroual men experience in considering the
existence of male homoual graphy has done little to stem the
tide of public displays and celebrations of work that would have been
universally deemed -- even a mere fifty years ago -- as depraved: many of
Robert Mapplethorpe's more explicit photographs as an example. Feminists
relish heteroual male discomfiture in these situations. They simply
revel in it. But, I suspect their empathic emotions are going to take an
awful beating when efforts to suppress imagination-based child
graphy ultimately fail on the same basis which permits the
dissemination and possession of homoual graphy. (The
feminist-led Supreme Court handed down its ruling in January of this
year while I was doing corrections on --Tangent.-- If anyone is
interested in reading my opinion of that ruling, write in. I think the
Justices made several fundamental errors that will come back to bite
them on their collective feminist asses.)
The point missed by the feminists, I think, is that the slope between
tolerance and celebration is a slippery one, indeed. if there exists a
clearly demarcated line -- which can be legally drawn -- between allowing
public celebrations of those ual orientations of which feminists
approve and disallowing public celebrations of those ual orientations
of which feminists disapprove, I would certainly be eager to read it in
iron-clad and unassailable legalese. But I am reasonably certain that
that line does not exist and can't possibly be made to exist despite the
frantic ef
|
|
|
