The Communication Decency Act

(The Fight For Freedom of Speech on the Internet)

The Communication Decency Act is a bill which has insulted our right as
American
citizens. It a bill which SHOULD not pass. I'll share with you how Internet us
ers are
reacting to this bill, and why they say it is unconstitutional.
Some individuals disagree with one part of the bill. According to
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ query/z?c104:s.652.enr:, which has the Communicat
ions
Decency Act on-line for public viewing,: "Whoever uses an Internet service to s
end to a
person or persons under 18 years of age......any comment, request, suggestion, p
roposal,
image,........or anything offensive as measured by contemporary community standa
rds,
sexual or excretory activities or organs.....shall be fined $250,000 if the per
son(s) is/are
under 18....... imprisoned not more than two years.......or both."
The wording of that section seems sensible. However, if this one little
paragraph is
approved, many sites such as the: Venus de Milo site located at:
http://www.paris.org/Musees/Louvre/Treasures/gifs/venusdemilo.gif; the Sistine C
hapel
at: http://www.oir.ucf.edu/wm/paint/auth/michelangelo/michelangelo.creation and
Michelangelo's David @ http://fileroom.aaup.uic.edu/FileRoom/images/image201.gif
could not be accessed and used by anybody under the age of 18. These works of a
rt and
many other museum pictures would not be available. The bill says these sites sh
ow
indecent pictures.
The next part of the CDA has everybody in a big legal fit. We, concerned
Internet
users, took the writers of this bill to court, and we won.
This part of the bill states: "Whoever....makes, creates, or solicits...
........any
comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication
which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent.......with intent to ann
oy, abuse,
threaten, or harass another person......by means of an Internet page..........sh
all be fined
$250,000 under title 18......imprisoned not more than two years....or both......
"
The writer of that paragraph of the bill forgot something. It violates
the
constitution. The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law....prohib
iting or
abridging the freedom of speech......the right of the people peaceably to assemb
le.....and to
petition the Government.............."
This bill does exactly that. It says we cannot express our feelings cle
anly. I
understand that what may be of interest to me, may be offensive to others. Many
people
put up warning signs on their websites stating, "This site may contain offensiv
e material.
If you are easily offended you may not want to come here." If the writers of th
is bill
would have listed that as a requirement there would have been no trouble.
Here is the way I look at it. I think that some things should be censore
d on the
Internet. Child pornography, for instance, is already illegal, so it follows tha
t it should also
be illegal on the Internet. Besides, psychologically, it damages the children in
volved.
Something else that should be banned from the Internet are "hacker" prog
rams
meant to harm other Internet users. Some examples of such programs are AOHell wh
ich
can give you access to America On-line for free and E-mail Bomb, or otherwise ha
rass
others using the service (American On-line just passed a bill that gave them the
right to
allow users to let them scan their mail for such harmful things.) Another thing
that could
be banned are text files which describe how to complete illegal actions, such as
make
bombs. The most famous is the "Anarchist Cook Book," which shows Internet users
some of the above problems.
I also believe that the use of log-ins, passwords, and rating systems on
pages for
the Internet are a good idea, and are not violations of our civil rights. They s
imply allow
the user to choose what they want to see. Some of these systems are already in u
se today,
along with programs that watch for obscene and profane keywords, and links to
pornographic sites.
What have Internet users learned from the courts? After all was said an
d done, we
have learned that passing unconstitutional laws like the CDA is not the exceptio
n but the
rule these days in Washington, DC.
Next, the people responsible for giving us the CDA are respectable Repub
licans
and Democrats, not liberals and conservatives. If someone would have asked an In
ternet
user who is opposed to the CDA to vote for Clinton or Dole this past fall, they
would say,
"Wouldn't that have been like being given a choice between cancer and heart dise
ase?" In
other words, disrespect for the President and Congress seem appropriate.
Third, the White House recognizes that it is cheaper to pass this bill,
by saying, this
is the law. Live with it. Doing this would prove to me this country is run by
politicians
who do not care about the people, their rights, or the law. This bill, if passe
d, would only
prove to me that all the government cares about is themselves and their money.
A great
president by the name of Abraham Lincoln once said, "This country was made for t
he
people, and run by the people..." America can now only hope, for another man li
ke
Lincoln, to step up, and lead this country, bringing it back to what it used to
be.
Also, it is time to focus on the things we need to have in this country,
like building
a new society. After World War II and Vietnam, I believe it is the computer gene
ration's
destiny to rebuild our family and give community abilities to evolve, solve prob
lems,
generate and distribute wealth, promote peace, and personal security.
Finally, freedom is struggle, by definition. Freedom on the Internet i
s not a gift.
It's the space we ourselves own, in the face of the government and the media, wh
o have
seemingly tried to take that space away from us.
CDA will also take away some sites such as: The Library of Congress Card
Catalog, which some say contains "indecent" language. We will not be able to vi
ew such
literature as Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and Nathaniel
Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter, because the CDA says those "classics" contain of
fensive
material. The act also prevents any sites in existence which tell teens about s
afe sex and
Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Most on-line newspapers such as USA TODAY, will
have to be blackened out when the monitor's screen shows them articles about sex
.
"Ignorance is caused by stupidity!" That has become a familiar "battle"
cry of
Internet users. The goverment knows hardly nothing about the pride Internet use
rs take in
having their own "world." That is the stupidity part of it. The ingnorance is
the politicians
refusing to listen to us. They do not want to understand.
Some ways you can help fight this terrible bill would be to march throug
h
Washington, DC on July 30, 1997. Many people have turned their web pages
backgrounds black to show they are protesting. Some display blue ribbons to sho
w an
Internet users' displeasure with the CDA.
Another way to show you care is to e-mail high political officers. I hav
e e-mailed
the current president (9:23 PM, 11-5-96) Bill Clinton and the vice-president Al
Gore. I
have also mailed Bob Dole and Jack Kemp.
On the more local level I have e-mailed Senators: Rick Santorum and Arle
n
Specter and Representatives: Jon Fox, Paul Kanjorski, Paul McHale, John Murtha,
Robert
Walker, and Curt Weldon. I have mailed: Gov. Tom Ridge, Lt. Gov. Mark Schweiker
and Senators Roy Afflerbach, Gibson Armstrong, Clarence Bell, David Brightbill,
J. Doyle
Corman, Daniel Delp, Vincent Fumo, Jim Gerlach, Stewart Greenleaf, Melissa Hart
, F.
Joseph Loeper, Roger Madigan, Robert Mellow, Harold Mowery Jr., John Peterson,
James Rhoades, Robert Robbins, Allyson Schwartz, Joseph Uliana, Noah Wenger, Rep
.
Lisa Boscola, Rep. Italo Cappabianca and Rep. Lawrence Curry have been contacted
by
myself as well. I have e-mailed Happy Fernandez, a Philadelphia City Councilwom
an.
The message I sent them is a smaller version of this one:
"To whom it may concern,
I am writing to you about the Communications Decency Act. I believe the
act is
unconstitutional. Amendment I states: "Congress shall make no law......abridgin
g the
freedom of speech...." This alone should prohibit this act. The Communications
Decency
Act will force many educational Internet sites to close. I, as a student, use t
he Information
Super Highway for exactly that, information. It is very helpful to have updated
facts and
so forth. With the Communications Decency Act such sites as the Library of Cong
ress
Electronical Card Catalog would be kept away from me because of "indecent" title
s. I use
the word indecent in quotation marks because I feel it is being used improperly.
Some
other sites, will be closed because of nudity. Such sites as Michelangelo's Dav
id, because
of the "nudity." There again I use quotations. Sites informing teenagers such
as myself of
the dangers of Unprotected Sex and AIDS, as well as other STD's will not be allo
wed to
be shown.
I know I may be taking this the wrong way, so I would appreciate respon
se telling
me why this act should pass. I hope you consider what I, and many others, have
been
saying.
Thank you for your time,
Ryne Crabb <seuss@usa.net>"
Another huge part of this world-wide protest was the Electronic March on
Washington, DC. People, of all ages, who care about the unconstitutionality of
the CDA,
went to the White House and made signs, etc. while marching around the White Hou
se's
property. Also, everybody was asked to e-mail the president in protest. Presid
ent Clinton
got over 10,000 e-mail messages on that day. I think it opened a lot of eyes.
Black Thursday was another big issue. Over 82% of the Internet's websit
es had a
"blackout." "Yahoo!" the famous search engine also blackened all of their pages
in
protest. It was beautiful how many heads were turned. Major businesses such as
AT&T
and ESPN also did their part in this battle by making comments about it to less
informed
Internet users.
Although there are other things happening in cyberspace, this issue rema
ins a
major problem. Chances are, however, when this piece of legal mess is settled,
happily or
not, another will come up. I can almost see what is next on the list. Some cou
ntries are
taxing the Internet. Trust me, we do not even WANT to get into that, yet.
I hope this opened your eyes as to the importance of this fight. We nee
d to show
the government this country still is made for the people, and run by the people.
That is
written in the constitution. We do not want to change the document our forefath
ers wrote
expressing their wishes for our future generations. That document protects our
freedoms.
It is important that the constitution remains intact so that it can preserve all
of our
freedoms including use of the Internet as we see fit.