4.1.4 Religious banning/Creating themed groups in catalogue

[carolynwhite2]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, Sean Dwyer <ewe2 at a...> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 11:43:09AM -0000, CarolynWhite2 wrote:
 Also, some cultural 
> > sensitivity here, Sean. The Americans, in particular, are far 
more 
> > exercised about this stuff than most other countries, and not 
only 
> > make up the majority of HPfGU membership, but will probably be 
> > genuinely interested to read old discussions of this sort - the 
> > issues are as live as ever in the US, as far as I can judge.
> 
> You misunderstand. I wasn't arguing for jettisoning the entire 
category, but
> making a distinction between _religious_ censorship and _secular_ 
censorship.
> That's hardly cultural insensitivity. But perhaps an American is a 
better
> judge than I.
> 
> I don't think the Stouffer case is relevant to a censorship 
discussion at all.
> Please look at the following club posts: 
765,766,768,769,773,3090,3387,3391,3396.
> 

Carolyn:
Ok, if the thread veers off into just censorship, I guess so. I 
expect I am being over-sensitive on behalf of the Yanks...when I 
first came across the topic on HPfGU I genuinely thought it was a 
joke - how wrong I was, but then I'm a heathen.

I agree that the Stouffer case is something quite different - a legal 
argument about plagiarism, nothing to do with censorship, religious 
or otherwise. That category should stay down in section 4, 
under 'other topics'.