STOP THE BAN ON THE INTERNET
-Melissa Kaban
Last week, President Bill Clinton signed a bill into law making it a crime to make indecent material available over computer networks. "This law, the Communications Decency Act, enacted as part of a massive telecommunications reform legislation, will impose $250,00 fines and prison terms for anyone who posts "indecent" material including dirty words, information on abortion issues, the text of classic works of fiction such as The Catcher in the Rye or Ulysses, artwork containing images of nudes, or rap lyrics, in a public forum"(CDT Policy Post). I strongly oppose this legislation. I believe that the bill is a direct violation of our first Amendment rights. It threatens the Internet as a viable medium for free expression, education, and commerce. Because it is a means of communications, such computer networks like the World Wide Web deserve first Amendment protections. Banning certain material is an unconstitutional infringement of free speech. Another important fact that needs to be addressed is that the government banning of material is a type of cyberspace book burning. Why is it that publications available in bookstores and libraries, like The Catcher in the Rye, are illegal to reproduce over the Internet? Also, issues such as abortion are being made illegal to discuss over computer networks. People should have the right to be able to find information on getting a medical procedure and book excerpts for a class assignment over the Internet just as easily as going to the bookstore, library, or newsstand. This new legislation should make everyone think about their own freedom of expression. "This bill is an unwarranted, unconstitutional intrusion by the Federal government into the lives of all Americans"(CDT Policy Post). I believe that it should be challenged in any possible way.
Sources:
Lewis, Peter H. "Compuserve Ends It's Internet Ban on Sex Material." New York Times. Feb. 14, 1996.
Lewis, Peter H. "Protest To Greet Communications Bill." New York Times. Feb. 7, 1996.
The Center For Democracy And Technology. http://www.cdt.org/ CDT Policy Post, Vol. 2 Num. 5. Feb. 1, 1996.
PARENTAL CENSORSHIP ON THE INTERNET
-Anne Boltz
I am writing in concern about censorship on the Internet. I oppose the idea of giving our government the control to censor our access to the Internet. Our constitution guarantees us many freedoms; by limiting any of them, I fear a rapid depletion of our freedoms will follow. However, I agree that many articles and pictures are not appropriate for all families or family members. Censorship is very personal, and should be considered with great concern. Each family has different beliefs and values along with their own opinion of what is "acceptable" or "not acceptable" for their children. Our culture is not based on a single set of structured beliefs, but rather a diverse range of beliefs. This is why I do not understand a parent's desire to allow government to create an inflexible censorship. The power to censor, not to censor, and what to censor can be determined by each parent.
I searched the Internet for information on parental censorship, and discovered a home page full of valuable information. In this article, Howard Rheingold promotes ideas on how parents can censor information without giving the control to the government. There is available software called "Surf Watch" which is relatively simple software. However, a common objection heard is, "that parents fear that their children know far more about computers than they do. Even the relatively simple software...to lock out objectionable material, is considered too difficult to use by some parents." I feel that if parents are truly concerned with the information their children are receiving, they should take the time to read over the proposed information and take the extra step to understand it, rather than to agree to letting the government decide what the country's children are allowed to learn and view. The article also mentioned that three of the biggest, most influential computer network companies in the computer network are working on more information about parental information-blocking software. Progressive Networks, Microsoft, and Netscape Communications will hopefully find a system that can further promote censoring within families rather than by government control.
Source: Citizen Censorship or Government Control?, http://www.well.com/user/hlr/tomorrow/cyberporntools.html, Howard Reingold. 1995.
IMMIGRATION: A NEVER ENDING DEBATE
-Melissa Betts and Andrea Doney
Immigration is a growing problem in the United States. In the last ten years 10 million immigrants have come to the United States seeking freedom and opportunity. This figure does not include the 3 million aliens who were allowed to legally reside in the US under the 1986 Immigration and Reform and Control Act.
A new bill is currently under consideration by the government, which aims to cut both legal and illegal immigration. Both parties support increasing security along the borders of the United States. With this increase in security the government hopes to cut down on illegal immigration as well as identify persons with expired visas.
If these new bills become legislation, the lives of legal immigrants will also be affected. Immigrants who came to the US planning to become financially stable before inviting their families to join them here will be disappointed. The chance of family members obtaining a visa will be next to impossible. Those immigrants who enter the US illegally will have a difficult time finding a job. Employers will be especially cautious when hiring foreigners because the government will not give federally funded contracts to employers who hire illegal immigrants knowingly.
If these laws are passed they could also benefit US citizens. The jobs held by illegal immigrants would then be made available to US workers. Professor Borjas of Harvard says "21% of immigrant households receive some type of public assistance, compared with 14% of native households." (NY Times 2-26-96) With the governments cuts, perhaps the welfare program's finances will be less strained.
Immigration is a problem that concerns everyone. If these laws are put into affect the lives of citizens and immigrants will change. If you would like to be updated about the new immigration laws there are many pages that you can read about on the Internet under Immigration.
To the Editor,
As future educators and parents, recent studies conducted using the drug Ritalin are very discouraging. All parents should be concerned about statistics on the children that are diagnosed with attention-deficit disorders, or ADD. An article in the New York Times written by Barbara Crossette stated that, "Ritalin is being prescribed for 3 percent to 5 percent of all the schoolchildren in the United States to control ADD." This article also stated that "the drug could pose dangers to the children's well-being over the long term and lead to adolescent addiction when improperly used."
As a future teacher this raised a few questions. First, are children being diagnosed with ADD so that educators and parents do not have to blame themselves for lack of discipline at home and in school? Or do these children really have learning disorders? Second, how many kids are diagnosed incorrectly and is there a way that educators and parents would be able to prevent this? And the final question, if diagnosed, how long should a child stay on the medication so that there will be no harm to the child in the future?
These are a couple of things that parents should be thinking about now so that in a few years we do not have, as a country, a group of adolescents that are addicted to Ritalin and feel that they can not act correctly in our society without it.
-Pete Trotto and Suzanne Mood
To return to front page, click here...or to continue reading, go to next page.