| Just as environmental pollution affects
our physical health, so too does the pollution of our culture affect the health
of our communities. There is much to celebrate in contemporary culture, but
also much to deplore: The glorification of violence, the glamorizing of drugs,
the abuse of women and children, whether in music or videos, advertising, or
tabloid journalism. Still, there are individuals and organizations using their
power as citizens and consumers to advance a cultural renewal in all aspects of
American life. We support and applaud them.
Their efforts will be critically important
in the Information Age, which, with all its tremendous benefits, brings a major
challenge to families. When the FBI reports that porn sites are the most
frequently accessed on the Internet, it’s time for parents at home — and
communities through their public institutions — to take action. We endorse
Republican legislation pending in the Congress to require schools and libraries
to secure their computers against on-line porn and predators if they accept
federal subsides to connect to the Internet. This is not a question of free
speech. Kids in a public library should not be victims of filth, and porn
addicts should not use library facilities for their addiction. Therefore,
public libraries and schools should secure their computers against on-line
pornography.
|
|
Because our democracy thrives on public access to diverse sources of information from
multiple sources, we support measures to ensure diversity, competition, and localism in media
ownership. |
| Freedom of CommunicationThe Issue: We oppose any abridgment of the freedom of speech through government censorship, regulation or control of communications media, including, but not limited to, laws concerning:
a) Obscenity, including
"pornography", as we hold this to be an abridgment of liberty of
expression despite claims that it instigates rape or assault, or demeans
and slanders women;
b) Reception and storage equipment, such as
digital audio tape recorders and radar warning devices, and the
manufacture of video terminals by telephone companies;
c)
Electronic bulletin boards, communications networks, and other
interactive electronic media as we hold them to be the functional
equivalent of speaking halls and printing presses in the age of
electronic communications, and as such deserving of full freedom;
d) Electronic newspapers, electronic "Yellow Pages", file
libraries, websites, and other new information media, as these deserve
full freedom; or
e) Commercial speech or advertising. We oppose
speech codes at all schools that are primarily tax funded. Language that
is deemed offensive to certain groups is not a cause for legal action.
We strongly oppose the government's burgeoning practice of
invading newsrooms, or the premises of other innocent third parties, in
the name of law enforcement. We further oppose court orders gagging news
coverage of criminal proceedings -- the right to publish and broadcast
must not be abridged merely for the convenience of the judicial system.
We deplore any efforts to impose thought control on the media, either by
the use of anti-trust laws, or by any other government action in the
name of stopping "bias." The Principle: We defend the rights of
individuals to unrestricted freedom of speech, freedom of the press and
the right of individuals to dissent from government itself. We recognize
that full freedom of expression is possible only as part of a system of
full property rights. The freedom to use one's own voice; the freedom to
hire a hall; the freedom to own a printing press, a broadcasting
station, or a transmission cable; the freedom to host and publish
information on the Internet; the freedom to wave or burn one's own flag;
and similar property-based freedoms are precisely what constitute
freedom of communication. At the same time, we recognize that freedom of
communication does not extend to the use of other people's property to
promote one's ideas without the voluntary consent of the owners.
Solutions: We would provide for free market ownership of
airwave frequencies, deserving of full First Amendment protection. We
oppose government ownership or subsidy of, or funding for, any
communications organization. Removal of all of these regulations and
practices throughout the communications media would open the way to
diversity and innovation. We shall not be satisfied until the First
Amendment is expanded to protect full, unconditional freedom of
communication.
Transitional Action: We advocate the
abolition of the Federal Communications Commission.
|
|
