[Wildcat Online: opinions] [ad info]





Proposals may be warranted

By Chad Farley
Arizona Daily Wildcat,
January 21, 2000
Talk about this story

To the editor,

Contrary to the beliefs of most students of this campus, I feel that the principles by which Senator Jean McGrath is promoting her "morality" bills are justified. First, a university's objective is to provide an opportunity for a higher education or to serve as a place of higher learning. We certainly do have a legal right to view explicit or pornographic material. However, it is neither the responsibility nor financial obligation of the university to provide access to explicit material of any kind that detracts from a university's primary goals.

Secondly, censorship or denial of our First Amendment rights by the government is not the issue, but whether or not the government should provide access to these controversial sights. It can still be seen, but the university won't help. The state isn't "policing morality" but is merely fulfilling the university's purpose without unnecessary expenditures - financially or in matters discounting university objectives. It would be another issue altogether if the university or government attempted to control the personal expressions of individuals, even if such expressions be deemed as explicit in nature, but the bill still allows for explicit material on the Internet. The university is not the means whereby one may employ their constitutional rights or liberty.

The individual exercises these rights. The university would not be locking down on one's rights. To claim an inability to exercise one's inalienable right of liberty, without the university's assistance, implies that one is void of the individual rationality and capability necessary to do so, as well as claim possession of such rights as one's own. Is one actually in possession of such constitutional rights if they lack the individual ability to exercise them? Constitutional rights are premised on the fact that we possess such rights and have the personal, innate ability to exercise them.

The bill does bring other controversial questions to light as well. I will admit the financial and possible technological impracticality of such a bill. However it still is not the university's responsibility to provide these things. Rights have not been taken, such material can still be found if one chooses. I would also note the difficulty on defining "educational uses" or "explicit." Personally speaking, I highly doubt that explicit sexual material in any circumstances either constitutes an educational use, or is actually a higher learning.

Chad Farley

Chemistry/East Asian Studies major

[end content]
[ad info]