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

Voice of reason



> Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 05:12:03 +0000
> From: "L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Woke up Free but Branded by his Fans Too?
>
> Okay, I have just slogged through sixty some messages jammed into my
inbox.
> Thank you again to Jim for the voice of reason.

> I've made a few comments, but here's my clinical analysis:

I also thank Jim for his voice of reason and for the comments made by
"keets". (Keets - I don't know if you remember but I met you at A Christmas
Carole starring Roger Daltrey - I'm glad I had the opportunity to meet the
person who always seems to have a fair and balanced response to all issues
presented on this list).

I have always believed that an individual's character and integrity were two
of the most important traits to analyze if someone is attempting to judge
another person's actions (obviously, we all know that to attempt to *judge*
anyone is not really appropriate; however, there are times when we feel the
need to try to more fully understand the actions of individuals whom we
admire when those actions don't conform to the standards we set for
ourselves).  With regards to Pete's current situation, I feel it is
essential to look first towards his character and integrity which he has
spent 60 years building. Over the course of 60 years, approximately 40 years
of which were spent in the public eye, I think Pete has proven himself to be
a very genuine, caring and honest person (this is not to be confused with
the fact that half the time you can't figure out what Pete really means from
some of his comments).  There have never been any issues for Pete on this
subject matter in the past or even now after all this publicity came out.
Generally, if someone has a problem or addiction it generally comes to light
no matter what they think they are doing to hide it.

Bottom line - what Pete did was extremely foolish and WRONG; however, I
believe that he in fact was investigating what was "out there" to enable him
to comment more fully on the subject matter.

Finally, the concept that entering a site once and paying $20 is the
equivalent of funding the next child rape is absurd reasoning. The epidemic
know as child pornography is much more complicated - we (yes, all of us)
have allowed child pornography to exist by not demanding to vendors that the
pornographic spam email stop, that pornographic web sites not be shut down,
that we allow our children to go with their friends to see movies that have
murder, inappropriate language, nudity, and indifference to the values that
we are supposed to be teaching our kids, ect, ect. If anyone decides to
start a crusade, then be a part of the solution to the problem and take
action against those who created the problem and are making money from it.

Vinman