[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#138541: ITP: debian-sanitize (was Re: inappropriate racist and other offensive material)



On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 12:17, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 17:15, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > There is a serious side to this, though.  Imagine categories of
> > "religion:christian" and "religion:subgenius", for example.  People of
> > an atheistic turn can remove the former, while people with a sense of
> > humor can install the latter.
> 
> People who aren't total butt-heads won't ban either.  I know many people who 
> own copies of religious texts that they don't believe in.  It's useful to 
> know what other people believe.

Right.  Notice, though that one of my examples was about requesting a
category, not banning it.

One of the advantages of this proposal over my own is that it doesn't
necessarily have to be negative.  For example, if I were curious about,
say, Hindu religious texts, I could turn to this software and request a
list of packages in that category and install them, or perhaps even have
the package notify me when new software of that type is available.

> "Not sponsoring religion" does not imply banning anything that is related to 
> religion.  Every government run university will have a huge amount of 
> religious books in their history, archaeology, and literature departments.

Unfortunately, that's not always true.  Consider, for example, a
workstation in an American public school, where a Jewish student notes
the presence of "bible-kjv-text" (including the New Testament). 
Depending on the student, the school, and the attitude of the lawyers,
that could create an embarassing incident.



Reply to: