Klarinet Archive - Posting 000514.txt from 2001/07

From: Frank Garcia <fgarcia@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: [kl] Another musician honoured!
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 08:29:30 -0400

Tony professes that he is not for censorship, yet he writes things like
this:

> Children are always being subjected to "censorship" by their parents. But
> is it censorship really? It isn`t is it? It`s "guidance" mixed with a
> <little> censorship.There`s nothing wrong with that - that is the norm,
> so why therefore should there not be some stronger guidance for the Pop
> Moguls to digest, especially as to me, 75% of their output seems
> specifically designed for young people.A lot of them are not too well
> versed in even moderate moral standards, and we allow them to enter these
> children`s minds. Perhaps a circular of acceptable ethical criteria
> similar to schools standards would see some improved responsibility.
> Maybe even circulated to song writers also.

And just who would be responsible for carrying out this aspect of your
plan?
*Whose moral standards?*

>> > Who suggested that I am a supporter of censorship?
>> It reads that way. You wrote it. More than one person has read it that
> way.
>
> I don`t agree. But perhaps you might just be persuading me
> that a little censorship is not too bad a thing after all. Censorship
> these days is
> pretty nearly dead on it`s feet. And a huge dilemma and uncertainty of
> standards is, as a result, engulfing us all to the extent that children
> are almost
> totally exposed to every single corrupting influence there is.

Perhaps "censorship is pretty nearly dead" is because many of us believe
that it infringes upon our freedom of expression. You are a supporter of
censorship because you state "But perhaps you might just be persuading me
that a little censorship is not too bad a thing after all."

> I <have> made clear my views on censorship. The debate does not mature
> significantly if you are trying to score points off <everything> I say.
> Governments offer guide lines in all kinds of environments, especially
> where children are concerned. I`m repeating myself now.

I do not believe you have made yourself clear on censorship. Obviously by
attempting to straddle the fence between "stronger guidance" as you wrote
earlier to defend against "unacceptable standards", and stating that you
are not for censorship is causing your house of cards to crumble. I, and I
am sure others see through this noble mission for what it really is.

> You are quite admirable Roger, and I respect your dedication to your kids.
> But what a pity that you have to do that at all.

Roger is doing/ has done what any conscientious parent would do, raise his
kids. Isn't it the role of parents, not government to guide kids through
their formative years? It is too bad that there are decreasing numbers of
parents like Roger. And it is equally pitiful that people will allow their
liberties to be infringed upon in order to shirk their resonsibility of
raising children.

> All I`m saying is that not <enough> parents show an understanding of the
> potential damage.

Should some people's ignorance be an excuse for the gov't to take away our
liberties?

> We still do occasionally have banned music. If it helps to protect
> children, then why not?

Because it infringes on my rights!

> But we are all musicians with
> the exception of - - - well, what <are> we if not? We are the protector
> of kids.

I thought *parents* are the protectors of kids... I don't want to be
responsible for the ethical and moral upbringing of all children
everywhere. What if I don't share the same moral and ethical values as you
do? What if I don't share the same cultural background as you do? The
parents are responsible for this. Tony, censor you and yours, but don't
strip me and everyone else of our rights.

>
> But no, I haven`t got any answers we can <all> agree on. I don`t think
> many people have - more Black and White required? But we shouldn`t knock
> guidance or standards, and wrongly criticise censorship. It has only been
> <with> censorship, in days gone by, that we have come to look at these
> issues, and learn, enabling us to use what intelligence we have to come to
> sensible ways forward in what we present to children. At present, I think
> we still have problems.
>

I have an answer with which many will agree. The constitution provides all
of us with certain rights. Because of this, we must keep a watchful eye, as
individuals, to protect our young, and to provide moral and ethical
guidance through their formative years. If you can not handle this
responsibility, that is your problem. But don't attempt to take away these
rights from me because you can't handle raising your children without "big
brother" policing everyone.

Sincerely,
Frank Garcia
fgarcia@-----.edu
http://www.d.umn.edu/music/faculty/fgarcia.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org