Re: Humankind "forgetful of its God"

On 31 Aug 2005 01:30:24 GMT, "Mark Foster" <mfoster@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Doug,
>
>>>... that [censorship] is not the purpose of Baha'i Review which is to guarantee the Faith is being represented properly.<<
>
>It is all a matter of definition. However, I have no problem calling
>the review process censorship.
>
>Generally speaking, censors do precisely what you wrote. They try,
>according to certain standards, to guarantee accuracy of presentation.

Quite so however:
cen·sor·ship [sénss?r shìp]
noun
1. suppression of published or broadcast material: the suppression
of all or part of a play, movie, letter, or publication considered
offensive or a threat to security
2. suppression of something objectionable: the suppression or
attempted suppression of something regarded as objectionable
3. ancient Roman office: the office, authority, or term of an
ancient Roman censor
4. psychiatry suppression of memories: the suppression of
potentially harmful memories, ideas, or desires from the conscious
mind

However the traditional connotative and denotative meanings of the
word both imply a negative purpose and fail to include any positive
purpose. I guess it depends on which side of the pencil you are on.

What I see is that one group says that pre-publication approval to
insure that the information presented by the author is accurate
compared to the organizations own criteria is within their right and
obligation of the organization.

While the other group is stating that anyone should be able to publish
or transmit whatever they wish at any time as freedom of speech.

Would I be correct in the assumption that you fall into the latter
group?

I am reminded of the old adage about freedom of speech not including
yelling FIRE in a crowded theater.

.

Relevant Pages