<VV> Communique Policy questioned

[Hank Kaczmarek]

All
As you could see from his post,  Mark sees himself as a Champion of Civil
Liberties.  Folks, PLEASE don't try to change his mind.

Please allow me to retort..

If the Communique was a publication that you could get at your local
newsstand, I might be closer to agreeing with Mark. We all realize such is
not the case.

 The Communique is NOT a periodical that is readily accessible to the
public. Sure, anyone can get a copy as long as they are willing to pay the
35.00/yr. Same could be said of Time or Newsweek. The difference is if I
subscribe to Time or Newsweek, I DO NOT BECOME A MEMBER of the "Time Society
of America", along with voting rights. Our circulation is among fewer than
7000 people, who DO have voting rights in the organization that publishes
the magazine.

In the 7-plus years I have posted to this forum, I have been enraged at some
of the posters, as they have been with me from time to time. But I have
NEVER failed to stand behind my opinion (as misguided as some of them may
have been).  And I have NEVER run into someone I had a flame war with, on or
off the Corvair Lists, that hasn't walked up to me with a smile and an
extended hand. And recieved the same as well.

 CORSA is a private organization that requires dues of its members. If there
is no policy stating that letters intended to be published by the club for
general dissemination in its magazine need to be signed, perhaps there
should be. I doubt that anyone is going out to hunt down and kill another
member for the expression of their opinion.  If it hasn't happened to me in
all this time, I don't see it as likely.

 In this case, if a signature was required, that letter would never have
been sent. IMO it didn't make any sense, compared with 17 years of dealing
with Corvair Vendors. I have no doubt that an overwhelming majority of our
members share my experiences with our vendors.

One of the Civil Liberties that all americans share (along with any non
American who is arrested here), is written down only in the Supreme Court
Miranda decision. It isn't guaranteed or written in the Constitution.

"You have the right to remain silent"---and if the only way one can express
themselves to the captive audience they are trying to reach is to do so
behind some shield, perhaps that right should be excercised.

Trying to impose the will of  "public policy" on private organizations is
just another attempt to break  up our society as we know it. This is the
goal of a segment of our body politic, as many of you realize.{Off list
requests will recieve a list containing many more)  May their attempts fail.

Hank


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "airvair" <airvair@richnet.net>
To: "Virtual Vairs" <virtualvairs@corvair.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 10:40 PM
Subject: <VV> Communique Policy questioned


> Often local papers have a policy to allow "name withheld by request"
> letters, and for good reason. The letter writer has to live in that
> community, and sometimes expressing an unpopular idea will result in
> unwanted and sometimes vicious reprisals. Not everyone subscribes to the
> founding father's quote of "I disagree with what you say, but I will
> defend to the death your right to say it."
>
> Flame me if you will, but those who want to remain anonomous when
> expressing an unpopular idea ought to have that option. And we should
> respect their right to do so.
>
> -Mark