In article <14...@mtx5a.UUCP> m...@mtx5a.UUCP (m.terribile) writes:
>In article <
15...@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> somebody writes:
>> and I loathe any interference by the state with something as personal as the
>> emotions, including sexual arousal, engendered by whatever art one
>> freely decides to experience. And my intuition is that a society which
>> regards sexual arousal as less desirable than horror or fear, and
>> forbids works which evoke the former while protecting those which evoke
>> the latter two, is *sick*.
>
>What about a society that holds these things as so personal and private
>that the community has the right to say that people shall not gratuitously
>manipulate the feelings and physical reactions of others?
>
MARK!!! GOOD GOD, MARK, WHAT ARE YOU *SAYING*?
No, wait. You're right. There are all these people who obviously don't
know any better, and we have to protect them (poor wuzzums). Good Lord,
you're *so* right. Look at all these people being shamelessly stimulated
in the adrenal gland at amusement parks. And people pay *money* to
be thus gratuitously manipulated-- they *must* be brain dead, so the state
*must* step in to save their souls...
Thanks for making me see the light.
>
> from Mole End Mark Terribile
--cosmique muffin (dorothy)
SWManipulator seeks Large Law Book (for use as Meese-seeking projectile)