You can't have him arrested as a theater owner because he isn't breaking any laws. What he is doing is violating the theater's policy of not allowing children under 17 into an R-rated movie without a legal guardian. This is merely a violation of theater policy, not of any sort of law. They could kick him out without refunding his ticket, but that's about it.
If kids sneak in on their own (without Katz), the same applies. If they buy a ticket for one movie and go to another, they could theoretically be charged with trespassing, for entering a theater they didn't buy a ticket for, but most likely would just be kicked out, or made to go back to the movie they bought a ticket for.
The problem is that it isn't a technical error. It's a metaphor. Perhaps you heard about those things in your high school english class. Maybe he should've spelled it out more clearly for the slashdot folks. "mp3 'em" does not mean "download the movies in mp3 format," it means "do to the movie industry with asf/mpeg/avi/mov what people already do to the record industry with mp3." It's a tactic, not a format.
Geez, slashdot people are too hung up on technical issues. The mp3 format itself is pretty irrelevant. It's a crappy-sounding format mired in patents. The underlying issues are what's important.
If Thomas Jefferson favored religion, I doubt he would've said any of the following:
"I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth." -Thomas Jefferson
"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own." -Thomas Jefferson to Horatio G. Spafford, 1814.
"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes." -Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, 1813.
"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787
After looking at the name further, it bears a striking resemblance to "kill us traitor!" Perhaps it's a subliminal message from the developers, and they removed the "i" from "traitor" to diguise it.
Oh wow. You get paid much more than the average salary in the United States (which is around $20,000-$25,000/year). That's what comes with the job. If you want, I'm sure you could find a 40 hour/week job at the local McDonald's that would solve your overwork problem.
Basically, there are billions of people in the world that work more than you, and get less money for it. Overall, you're pretty damn well off. At least you don't work 100 hours/week and have to live off $100/year.
No. I also think all-or-nothing solutions should be avoided. If Christianity and Buddahism (sp?) are allowed a presence in school (not mandated), why does satanism have to be allowed?
Because either you allow all religions, or you allow no religions. Anything less is religious descrimination, and therefore unconstitutional. You cannot say "I will only allow the religions I like."
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson, Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779.
I disbelieve and abhor religion in public schools and the government support of religion, as do many people. Obviously, Thomas Jefferson would therefore oppose any such government support of religion (the above lines were specifically written in opposition to government support of religion, as can be deduced from the title of the statute).
Oh you must be thinking of the Constitution. I don't recall Congress being too worried about that document. It does forbid a standing army, after all, and guess what, we have a standing army.
Anyway, they'd probably weasel something in such as tying it to some sort of grant..."Make age restrictions on movies or we don't give you federal highway funding." That's how the gvt. finally forced Louisiana to raise the drinking age to 21 (The majority of Louisianians favored keeping it at 18, but they had little choice. Nice democracy we have.)
You seem to be ignoring the difference between government allowing religion and government supporting religion. The first is required, the second is not allowed. Your first example, a Bible study group, is indeed allowed in schools, as long as other religions are allowed to form their own groups (if the other religions wish to do so). Get more facts before making patently false assertions.
The ten commandments are allowed in schools if you are studying them as a religious document. As a "this is the morality you should follow" document, they are unquestionably not allowed. The commandment "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" is offensive towards members of other religions. "Thou shalt honor the sabbath day and keep it holy" has no place in a public school - what business of the school's is it what you do on Saturday or Sunday (whichever one your religion considers the Sabbath)?
As for Judeo-Christian, the Old Testament is Judeo-Christian. That's a fact. It's a holy book that is shared by the Jewish and Christian faiths. Since the exact same book is used by both faiths, I don't see how the term "Judeo-Christian" is misapplied in this case.
Finally, the MPAA is not society. The MPAA is an industry group that has its opinions as to what kids should see. Many parents, including my own, differ greatly in opinion with the MPAA. The MPAA is basically committed to keeping kids from seeing nudity and foul language, while allowing them to see as much violence as they want. It is not a question of occasional screw-ups, it's constant. Perhaps it's the Puritan legacy of America that makes us afraid of sex, perhaps it's something else.
There is no law legally mandating the MPAA's age recommendations. Such a law would be an unconstitutional delegation of government authority to a private industry group, and hence would not stand up in court.
The movie industry is voluntarily asking for IDs in an attempt to keep it this way. They don't want the government to set up its own movie ratings board which would make be able to make itself mandatory, so they're trying to say "look, we can take care of it ourselves" by doing this voluntarily.
It's not their choice. Given the choice, they'd gladly let anybody into the theater, provided the person pays the $5 or whatever for a ticket (and preferably buys some of their overpriced popcorn). The two multiplexes near my house never asked me for an ID to get into R-rated movies when I was 14-16. Never once was I told I couldn't get in. In the last two weeks, however, I've been asked for my driver's license every time before I've been sold the ticket. This all comes in the wake of clinton's little "ask for IDs" schpiel, and the movie industry is complying in an attempt to stave off government regulation.
In summary, they don't like checking IDs, but they'd rather do that than risk government intervention (such as making the "no under 17 people into R rated movies" rule a law, rather than just the "suggestion" it is now).
That's perfectly fine with me. In many states (including Texas), it's also legal for children of any age to drink, as long as their parents buy the alcohol and supervise them consuming it.
In many European countries, the 12-year-old can purchase the alcohol him or herself, legally. I first had alcohol in Greece, probably when I was around 4 or 5. I'm not an alcoholic (I rarely drink). The teenage alcoholism rate in Europe is also lower than in the U.S., where this is not legal. Obviously the U.S. laws are counterproductive.
Thanks for an insightful comment...glad to see that not all Christians in this country are fanatics of the Christian Coalition variety (it just seems that way if you hang out in alt.religion.christianity or #bible on IRC).
I agree with you, despite your sarcasm. In fact, in many European countries, there is no age requirement for the purchase of alcohol, and teenage alcoholism is actually lower than in the United States. Prohibition does not solve problems.
I am not sure quite how to respond to a story like this... You see, I happen to be a part of a minority (?) group of Slashdot readers who actually think that such moral limitations and the so on are actually worthwhile. I think the real problem I see here is on the part of the author and the mother. First off, the author. I am amazed that the author of this story can turn himself into a hero by lying and cheating. Now, I am sure that you can come up with all kinds of reasons to tell me all that doesn't matter - they can already get it off the web, nobody was getting hurt, yada yada yada. The truth of the matter is this: IT WAS WRONG. It was a lie and an embarrassment to the concept of freedom which you chose to abuse on that day. Shame on you.
I don't see the problem of it. The mother wanted her children to see the movie, and Katz offerend to let them do so without forcing the mother to take up her time seeing a movie that she herself may not have particularly cared about.
And to the mother. That a woman when even consider to take her children to such a show is an embarrassment to the word mother. "Mom" is a word which represents a caring, nuturing class of women who have the BEST interest of the children in mind. Come on, figure it out here, people. How can anyone ignore the crud that comes out of South Park.
Have you seen the movie yourself, or are you merely ranting about subjects with which you are not acquainted? The moral message that southpark, through its use of satire, gave was that people should be personally responsible. If a kid does something bad, blame the kid, not the movies/tv shows/books/music that you think could have possibly influenced him or her to do so. How is a movie about personal responsibility and good parenting a bad thing to have your children watch?
As a Christian in this nation I say enough is enough. I don't want to see the people on the fringe of society et abused whenever something like Columbine happens. I do, however, want to see americans start standing up for a little decency and the like.
Your definition of "decency" or mine? As an agnostic in this nation, I find the degrading of women and violence in the Old Testament to be offensive (see the section where God commands the israelites to, ahem, "use," their female prisoners)
And about the "Ten Commandments" comment in the first part of your story - give me a break. Our country is closer now to "religious discrimination" then in ever has been - but only in the context of restricting prayer in school and the like. I'd say more, but I don't have the time.
Prayer is not restricted in schools. A child may pray at his or her convenience as long as it does not interrupt the class. Any free time the child has may be used for prayer, meditation, or whatever else the child chooses to do quietly.
Other Christian Slashdot readers: SPEAK UP! Don't fight with me over ANY of the little details in my post here and just band together to raise the voice that we DO HAVE.
You make the fallacious assumption that all Christians agree with your viewpoint. I personally know many Christians, including my parents, who are not right-wing fundamentalists of the Christian Coalition variety. In fact, if you took the time out of your busy schedule to actually read the Bible, you'll notice that it specifically forbids making a public show of prayer, as the Pharisees did, and instead commands that prayer be done quietly in your own home. If you believe in the Bible, I don't see how you could favor teacher-led school prayer. I know several devout Christians who oppose it for that reason - not only is it sinful, but it cheapens prayer when it is a school-led mandatory action.
Wow, glad to see that there are still some BBSs up and running. Do you happen to have any listed for the 713 or 281 area codes? My last FidoNet feed went down about 6 months ago =(
MEEPT!! is an eccentric user of slashdot who has been posting for nearly two years or so. He used to post a lot more in earlier times, but ever since Slashdot killed his account, forcing him to create a new one, he seems to be a less frequent visitor. His posts are usually insightful, but he presents his arguments/information in a humorous or unusual way, such as haikus and other poems, leading many people to misunderstand him. He's also not a Linux zealot, which gets him in trouble with many of the fanatics around here. I personally find him humorous.
"The glorious MEEPT would like to bring all the divided factions of linux into one big divided faction." - The Glorious MEEPT!!
Winamp is uncrippled shareware that costs $10 to register. Legally and ethically, it costs $10. In practice, most people use without paying.
As for performance, I don't see a problem with Winamp. It consistantly uses less than 5% CPU on my pII 266, and uses very little RAM. It has a fully customizable interface, and you can modify virtually everything, even including the mp3 decoding (if you want to write your own mp3 decoder plugin to replace Nitrane).
Well, I use Windows 95 myself, so I can't give you any specifics, sorry. I know a few people that have used it though, and they say that you set it up through one of those "wizards" windows is so fond of.
Slashdot Mirror
You can't have him arrested as a theater owner because he isn't breaking any laws. What he is doing is violating the theater's policy of not allowing children under 17 into an R-rated movie without a legal guardian. This is merely a violation of theater policy, not of any sort of law. They could kick him out without refunding his ticket, but that's about it.
If kids sneak in on their own (without Katz), the same applies. If they buy a ticket for one movie and go to another, they could theoretically be charged with trespassing, for entering a theater they didn't buy a ticket for, but most likely would just be kicked out, or made to go back to the movie they bought a ticket for.
The problem is that it isn't a technical error. It's a metaphor. Perhaps you heard about those things in your high school english class. Maybe he should've spelled it out more clearly for the slashdot folks. "mp3 'em" does not mean "download the movies in mp3 format," it means "do to the movie industry with asf/mpeg/avi/mov what people already do to the record industry with mp3." It's a tactic, not a format.
Geez, slashdot people are too hung up on technical issues. The mp3 format itself is pretty irrelevant. It's a crappy-sounding format mired in patents. The underlying issues are what's important.
You mean Sun + Netscape + AOL + CompuServe + Winamp + ICQ
If Thomas Jefferson favored religion, I doubt he would've said any of the following:
"I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth." -Thomas Jefferson
"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own." -Thomas Jefferson to Horatio G. Spafford, 1814.
"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes." -Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, 1813.
"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787
After looking at the name further, it bears a striking resemblance to "kill us traitor!" Perhaps it's a subliminal message from the developers, and they removed the "i" from "traitor" to diguise it.
You never know.
Oh wow. You get paid much more than the average salary in the United States (which is around $20,000-$25,000/year). That's what comes with the job. If you want, I'm sure you could find a 40 hour/week job at the local McDonald's that would solve your overwork problem.
Basically, there are billions of people in the world that work more than you, and get less money for it. Overall, you're pretty damn well off. At least you don't work 100 hours/week and have to live off $100/year.
The legal age in Germany is 16.
Greece has no age limit (anybody can purchase).
The UK is 16, IIRC.
Perhaps I'm just strange, but I have a problem trusting products whose names begin with "kill."
Then perhaps the people saying these things are not mature enough themselves to understand what satire is.
No. I also think all-or-nothing solutions should be avoided. If Christianity and Buddahism (sp?) are allowed a presence in school (not mandated), why does satanism have to be allowed?
Because either you allow all religions, or you allow no religions. Anything less is religious descrimination, and therefore unconstitutional. You cannot say "I will only allow the religions I like."
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson, Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779.
I disbelieve and abhor religion in public schools and the government support of religion, as do many people. Obviously, Thomas Jefferson would therefore oppose any such government support of religion (the above lines were specifically written in opposition to government support of religion, as can be deduced from the title of the statute).
Oh you must be thinking of the Constitution. I don't recall Congress being too worried about that document. It does forbid a standing army, after all, and guess what, we have a standing army.
Anyway, they'd probably weasel something in such as tying it to some sort of grant..."Make age restrictions on movies or we don't give you federal highway funding." That's how the gvt. finally forced Louisiana to raise the drinking age to 21 (The majority of Louisianians favored keeping it at 18, but they had little choice. Nice democracy we have.)
You seem to be ignoring the difference between government allowing religion and government supporting religion. The first is required, the second is not allowed. Your first example, a Bible study group, is indeed allowed in schools, as long as other religions are allowed to form their own groups (if the other religions wish to do so). Get more facts before making patently false assertions.
The ten commandments are allowed in schools if you are studying them as a religious document. As a "this is the morality you should follow" document, they are unquestionably not allowed. The commandment "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" is offensive towards members of other religions. "Thou shalt honor the sabbath day and keep it holy" has no place in a public school - what business of the school's is it what you do on Saturday or Sunday (whichever one your religion considers the Sabbath)?
As for Judeo-Christian, the Old Testament is Judeo-Christian. That's a fact. It's a holy book that is shared by the Jewish and Christian faiths. Since the exact same book is used by both faiths, I don't see how the term "Judeo-Christian" is misapplied in this case.
Finally, the MPAA is not society. The MPAA is an industry group that has its opinions as to what kids should see. Many parents, including my own, differ greatly in opinion with the MPAA. The MPAA is basically committed to keeping kids from seeing nudity and foul language, while allowing them to see as much violence as they want. It is not a question of occasional screw-ups, it's constant. Perhaps it's the Puritan legacy of America that makes us afraid of sex, perhaps it's something else.
There is no law legally mandating the MPAA's age recommendations. Such a law would be an unconstitutional delegation of government authority to a private industry group, and hence would not stand up in court.
The movie industry is voluntarily asking for IDs in an attempt to keep it this way. They don't want the government to set up its own movie ratings board which would make be able to make itself mandatory, so they're trying to say "look, we can take care of it ourselves" by doing this voluntarily.
It's not their choice. Given the choice, they'd gladly let anybody into the theater, provided the person pays the $5 or whatever for a ticket (and preferably buys some of their overpriced popcorn). The two multiplexes near my house never asked me for an ID to get into R-rated movies when I was 14-16. Never once was I told I couldn't get in. In the last two weeks, however, I've been asked for my driver's license every time before I've been sold the ticket. This all comes in the wake of clinton's little "ask for IDs" schpiel, and the movie industry is complying in an attempt to stave off government regulation.
In summary, they don't like checking IDs, but they'd rather do that than risk government intervention (such as making the "no under 17 people into R rated movies" rule a law, rather than just the "suggestion" it is now).
That's perfectly fine with me. In many states (including Texas), it's also legal for children of any age to drink, as long as their parents buy the alcohol and supervise them consuming it.
In many European countries, the 12-year-old can purchase the alcohol him or herself, legally. I first had alcohol in Greece, probably when I was around 4 or 5. I'm not an alcoholic (I rarely drink). The teenage alcoholism rate in Europe is also lower than in the U.S., where this is not legal. Obviously the U.S. laws are counterproductive.
Thanks for an insightful comment...glad to see that not all Christians in this country are fanatics of the Christian Coalition variety (it just seems that way if you hang out in alt.religion.christianity or #bible on IRC).
I agree with you, despite your sarcasm. In fact, in many European countries, there is no age requirement for the purchase of alcohol, and teenage alcoholism is actually lower than in the United States. Prohibition does not solve problems.
I am not sure quite how to respond to a story like this... You see, I happen to be a part of a minority (?) group of Slashdot readers who actually think that such moral limitations and the so on are actually worthwhile. I think the real problem I see here is on the part of the author and the mother. First off, the author. I am amazed that the author of this story can turn himself into a hero by lying and cheating. Now, I am sure that you can come up with all kinds of reasons to tell me all that doesn't matter - they can already get it off the web, nobody was getting hurt, yada yada yada. The truth of the matter is this: IT WAS WRONG. It was a lie and an embarrassment to the concept of freedom which you chose to abuse on that day. Shame on you.
I don't see the problem of it. The mother wanted her children to see the movie, and Katz offerend to let them do so without forcing the mother to take up her time seeing a movie that she herself may not have particularly cared about.
And to the mother. That a woman when even consider to take her children to such a show is an embarrassment to the word mother. "Mom" is a word which represents a caring, nuturing class of women who have the BEST interest of the children in mind. Come on, figure it out here, people. How can anyone ignore the crud that comes out of South Park.
Have you seen the movie yourself, or are you merely ranting about subjects with which you are not acquainted? The moral message that southpark, through its use of satire, gave was that people should be personally responsible. If a kid does something bad, blame the kid, not the movies/tv shows/books/music that you think could have possibly influenced him or her to do so. How is a movie about personal responsibility and good parenting a bad thing to have your children watch?
As a Christian in this nation I say enough is enough. I don't want to see the people on the fringe of society et abused whenever something like Columbine happens. I do, however, want to see americans start standing up for a little decency and the like.
Your definition of "decency" or mine? As an agnostic in this nation, I find the degrading of women and violence in the Old Testament to be offensive (see the section where God commands the israelites to, ahem, "use," their female prisoners)
And about the "Ten Commandments" comment in the first part of your story - give me a break. Our country is closer now to "religious discrimination" then in ever has been - but only in the context of restricting prayer in school and the like. I'd say more, but I don't have the time.
Prayer is not restricted in schools. A child may pray at his or her convenience as long as it does not interrupt the class. Any free time the child has may be used for prayer, meditation, or whatever else the child chooses to do quietly.
Other Christian Slashdot readers: SPEAK UP! Don't fight with me over ANY of the little details in my post here and just band together to raise the voice that we DO HAVE.
You make the fallacious assumption that all Christians agree with your viewpoint. I personally know many Christians, including my parents, who are not right-wing fundamentalists of the Christian Coalition variety. In fact, if you took the time out of your busy schedule to actually read the Bible, you'll notice that it specifically forbids making a public show of prayer, as the Pharisees did, and instead commands that prayer be done quietly in your own home. If you believe in the Bible, I don't see how you could favor teacher-led school prayer. I know several devout Christians who oppose it for that reason - not only is it sinful, but it cheapens prayer when it is a school-led mandatory action.
Wow, glad to see that there are still some BBSs up and running. Do you happen to have any listed for the 713 or 281 area codes? My last FidoNet feed went down about 6 months ago =(
MEEPT!! is an eccentric user of slashdot who has been posting for nearly two years or so. He used to post a lot more in earlier times, but ever since Slashdot killed his account, forcing him to create a new one, he seems to be a less frequent visitor. His posts are usually insightful, but he presents his arguments/information in a humorous or unusual way, such as haikus and other poems, leading many people to misunderstand him. He's also not a Linux zealot, which gets him in trouble with many of the fanatics around here. I personally find him humorous.
"The glorious MEEPT would like to bring all the divided factions of linux into one big divided faction." - The Glorious MEEPT!!
Winamp is uncrippled shareware that costs $10 to register. Legally and ethically, it costs $10. In practice, most people use without paying.
As for performance, I don't see a problem with Winamp. It consistantly uses less than 5% CPU on my pII 266, and uses very little RAM. It has a fully customizable interface, and you can modify virtually everything, even including the mp3 decoding (if you want to write your own mp3 decoder plugin to replace Nitrane).
It's never crashed on me.
Unfortunately, there's a bit too little of #5 lately, and too much of all the other crap.
How is a clone of Windows software supposed to draw people from Windows to Linux? They could just run the original software and stick with Windows.
Perhaps there's something about XMMS I'm missing? Is there anything it provides that doesn't exist in an equivalent Windows tool?
Well, I use Windows 95 myself, so I can't give you any specifics, sorry. I know a few people that have used it though, and they say that you set it up through one of those "wizards" windows is so fond of.