LGBT Sites Blocked in Tennessee — but not “Ex-Gay” Sites
Friday, April 17th, 2009 by Harry Lewis
During cheap viagra from usa this procedure, a person's blood passes through a filter in cheap prescription without prescription a machine that acts as healthy kidneys would, removing waste buy cheap 60 side effects liquid and any extra water and salts from the blood. Similar cheap amikacin in usa to depression, doctors often treat anxiety with medications, psychotherapy, or discount lipitor a combination of both. A person living with CKD should viagra no prescription speak with a doctor if they think they are experiencing cheap vibramycin any mental health conditions. A mixed episode is a distinct buy cheap cialis online period during which a person experiences symptoms of both mania order cheap for or hypomania and depression simultaneously. These changes can be relatively cheapest allopurinol mild and intermittent, making them easy to overlook or dismiss atarax sale as normal fluctuations in mood. They gave the participants the order celebrex option to take either an antidepressant — the SSRIs escitalopram find estradiol online or sertraline — or participate in a running group two cheap cipro pill to three times per week. Additionally, the American Heart Association buy dexamethasone without prescription reports that over time, chronic depression can lead to heart disease.
I wrote in the post just below that given a legal pretext to block web sites, as is being done in Korea, other governments would adopt similar strategies to serve their own purposes. This afternoon’s news brings a great example, right from the USA. Tennessee schools are blocking informational sites about gay and lesbian sexuality, apparently on the pretext that they are harmful to minors. The sites of ministries by heterosexual “converts” from homosexuality are not filtered out.
April 17th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
It does seem silly, but on the other hand, the linked-to article refers to students’ “Constitutional Rights” that are being violated, and offhand I’m at a loss to think which?
April 18th, 2009 at 11:07 am
It may very well be that the filters are intentionally blocking LBGT sites and allowing ‘ex-gay’ sites through. But it may also simply be a reflection of the difficulty to accurately block truly ‘obscene’ content on the school filters without inflicting significant collateral damage. For example, information on breast cancer screening has been blocked in the past, but there is no pro-cancer agenda behind the blocking. Any automated content-filtering system will have many false positives and negatives; if we’re going to use these systems, we must recognize this fact and not rush to judgment whenever inaccurate blocks are detected.
April 18th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
I am not a lawyer, but it’s my understanding that First-Amendment free speech rights imply a right to hear as well as a right to speak, even for minors. Now I’m sure there are all kinds of limitations on that, particularly with sexually provocative material, given that children are involved. Nonetheless, as I understand it, a public school couldn’t have a rule, for example, that its library would carry only books written by Democrats. Whether the same sort of principle would apply in this case I don’t know, but I’ll bet that’s what the ACLU rep is referring to.
Also, Tyler is right — it’s at least possible that the distinction here is not political but based on some list of bad words which one site has but the other doesn’t. And I should have pointed out that the source is an LGBT newsletter, and not an impartial analyst.