Some of my favorite readings this month were those concerning the freedom of information and censorship. Since I’ve been interested in this topic for many years, it is something I’ve considered doing for work in the future (hopefully with the American Library Association). I was happy to learn the difference between “suppression” and “deterrence” in censorship, as well as the opposing viewpoints of my fellow students. While these opposing views have not necessarily changed my opinion on the matter, it has forced me to view things in a different way and take other things into consideration. For instance, during the discussion for that week, several students noted how some sites should definitely be censored, either because they encourage people to have affairs (thus breaking up families), they teach people how to make meth and/or bombs, or they contain child pornography. There was some great discussion about the website encouraging people to have affairs: some thought it was morally okay to allow people the right to cheat on their spouse, others thought because it’s illegal to practice adultery in some places that it is immoral to host such a site, and still others reminded us that some couples have agreed to cheat on each other (polyamory and open relationships).
This small yet engaging discussion has stuck with me, and will remind me to consider the other side of the coin. There is no way that everyone can agree on some moral points, as we’ve all been brought up in very different homes. This is especially true for another topic we discussed that week, which was whistle-blowing. Many conservative and military families are staunchly patriotic and aggressively protective of war heroes, which is something to remember when debating whether or not American military secrets should be released (which ones, how important, if at all, etc).
My opinion on these topics has become more concrete. A personal example I’d like to use is that of abortion and censorship in that regard. My mother is extremely pro-life, while I am pro-choice. While she doesn’t usually support hate speech, she was certainly not angry or upset about the abortion doctor being killed because of the website posting his personal information (because to her, a murderer was killed. Was anyone that sad about Jeffrey Dahmer dying in prison?). She worked for a pro-life clinic that regularly posted images of aborted babies on their website, with the intent to dissuade pregnant women from getting an abortion. She also picketed abortion clinics in the 80’s. This week’s information has helped me to understand the difference between these things: where the line is crossed is more apparent to me. The doctor’s information being hosted on the site should have been completely illegal, as it is an invasion of privacy and it encourages violent behavior. However, peacefully protesting by presenting facts (including horrific images of aborted babies) is and should be legal.
Sara - do you therefore oppose WikiLeaks? For instance - the posting of soldiers names & ss. Or do you pick and choose what and whose personal information is disclosed?
ReplyDeleteI had to step away from the discussion about certain sites needing absolute censorship because they encourage 'cheating' which 'breaks up families.' Precisely because the student who posted the original post didn't seem familiar with the concepts of polyamory, or open relationships, and I did not want to argue cases for or against atypical relationships and families. Near the end of the week I did want to go back and reply to that post, but I was too late, as it was after midnight on a Sunday.
ReplyDeleteThere's a lot to be said about differing people having differing views even applying the same school of ethical theory to a concept such as 'romance' or 'family life.'
Hi Jacob, please don't take this the wrong way but when I originally posted about censoring the website AshleyMadison, I did consider open relationships (swingers). I guess when I saw the word 'affair' In their slogan 'Life is short. Have an affair.' I immediately thought of a married person committing adultery, which is not an open relationship. I do see your point and Professor Compton's that under an atypical relationship, there is justification for the existence of this website and maybe I could have replied that there are websites like swinglifestyle.com or swingersspace.com that are more geared to accommodate polyamorist or swingers, but I was probably really tired (sorry professor Compton) the night I read the reply and I never came back to it :(
DeleteAs for cheating breaking up families, my conclusion is very weak because there are times when no children are involved and sometimes counseling (having a big heart to forgive) helps a family get through events of this nature. Once again, don't take this the wrong way and It is good to see and consider all sides to issues. Hope you had a good spring break and I guess It's back to the grind :)