Come on, Sarah! Get with the times in Provo. This is about ideology. It's not about right and wrong. The ends justify the means with some people.

Is this one of those "ends justifies the means" things?

Sarah Burgess,

Have you actually read the information about Jack Thompson, both the things that he has accomplished and the proceedings against him by the 'bar association'?

You and I have the right to speak out about anything that we choose. Mr. Thompson has the right to speak out against anything that he chooses - except about members of the 'bar association'.

Is that what you want - limited free speech? Do you want to give someone - anyone - the right to censor your speech? I don't.

Read the material thoroughly and then tell us exactly how, as you wrote, "Jack Thompson fights without honor, integrity or honesty".

Sarah doesn't want to shut the man up, he just doesn't want this liar and manipulator "honored" at Provo's ironically named "Freedom Festival." No court in the country will allow Thompson to even appear before it, he's such an outrageous Joe McCarthy-type grandstander. Thompson has used the issue of decency to make himself extremely rich and very celebrated. He is about as cynical a profiteer as there is.

Words are cheap.

Give specific examples that would stand up in court. The information that I've read does not support your assertions.

Let's see . . . the "Provo Freedom Festival" honors a guy who works for the cause of censorship.

That's either totally, hilariously, perfectly ironic; or totally, hilariously, perfectly congruent.

I can't decide. I also can't stop laughing. I'm going to be pondering this all day.

To 12:20 p.m.,

Do you consider censorship to include advocacy against violent crimes AFTER students were killed in a school that had violent video games inside the school?

I consider that to be responsible.

Children are under the care and are the responsibility of "adults". Some adults think that making a dollar off a child, no matter what it does to that child, is his right. Is that what you believe?

If children need no protection under the law, then why do we have so many laws on the books protecting children? In your view, if someone can show a relationship between music, games, movies, magazines, or any other media, and violence (murder) that resulted from active participation in that media, do you consider that person to be infringing on your rights?

Do you actively encourage children to act out their fantasies? Do you actively encourage children to be violent? Or, do you teach children principles of self-restraint?

Society could use more adults that spoke on behalf of the children.

For whom do you speak?

The children! The children! Shouldn't somebody think of the children?

Yes, somebody should. How about the parents?

I cannot believe the Freedom Festival is honoring this man. He is a joke in the legal community. In fact, he was recently disbarred for being such a complete fanatic.

Let's face the fact that all those who support his tactics and his goals are really just fighting for censorship under the guise of "protecting the children."

Video games are just an easy scapegoat for those who don't want to face society's real problems. As soon as Columbine happened everybody started blaming the fact that the killers played Doom. Few seemed to mention that they were picked on, belittled, and bullied, and had a terrible home life. Which factors do you think really motivated them?

Why is it so hard for parents to just be parents? Why do people keep insisting that society do their job for them?

I meant to say he recently had disbarment proceedings begun against him. I apologize for that error.

Jeffery,

It's easy to parrot half-truths isn't it? Even though you corrected yourself, you didn't report the facts concerning the proceedings against him, did you? You didn't point out the fact that he spoke against other members of the bar, and that the proceedings were about that fact, not about his advocacy.

Doctors don't like others speaking against them. Lawyers don't like it either. You probably don't like people like me questioning your posts. The difference is, that you can do it. I can do it. Doctors can do it. But, lawyers in Florida can't.

In this case, who is trying to silence whom?

In my neighborhood we have crossing guards to help children cross the street. We have teachers monitoring the playgrounds at the local elementary schools. We have police officers cruising up and down the streets watching out for the children. Yes, each child has a parent, but thay have many, many others looking out for them.

IF three students had been killed at the high school just across the street, there would be many advocates shouting out against anything that might have triggered the killings.

But you want to squelch the freedom to advocate, don't you?

Mr. Richards, I speak only for myself. Wouldn't presume anything more.

And speaking for myself, I must say that I don't think you can nanny Americans into good behavior. When some kid shoots up a school, it isn't a video game that CAUSES it. The game may well have CONTRIBUTED to the event, but people who like to ban things--especially art and media--often make the mistake of assuming causality. That is: violent video games causes violence, therefore, banning violent video games will elimnate violence. This is, of course, a flawed syllogism, but emotionally appealing because it offers a simple solution to a complex problem. I argue that when a kid shoots up a school there are a myriad of contributing factors, most importantly an unstable home life.

Being an American by birth and custom, I am reluctant to inhibit any individual liberties. As for making a buck off of children, I am far more concerned about Happy Meals than I am video games. The two together very occasionally produce murderers, but quite regularly produce physically unhealthy, stupid children.

As always, I say that if we tend our own houses, we won't have to call the government to baby-sit.

Geez, Mike, speak out about seeing it only one way.

You talk about how people are squelching freedom, yet out of the other side of your mouth are perfectly happy "squelching" the freedom to create.

I don't care what this whacko says, I just think it's a joke they are honoring him for BEING a whacko.

I don't even care if anybody has a problem with violent video games. What I have a problem with is people who try to force their own set of morals on other people.

Yep, we have crossguards to protect kids from dangerous roads. But we don't ban cars, do we? Parents are responsible for the content that is brought into their home, and the buck stops there.

It would not matter what anybody created if parents would just put their money where their mouth is, quit telling the world how to live their lives, and started doing their job as parents.

That is where the responsibility lies, and only there.

Jeffery,

If it were only so easy.

Think for just a minute.

You're proposing a Nation without laws. You're proposing a community without police. You're proposing streets without Stop signs.

If parents did their job, we wouldn't need any of those things.

You may not need a Stop sign, but I'm glad that we have them.

Mike,

You asked if someone had read the filings made by this rambling wacko. Well I have. I even had a friend of mine who is a lawyer and isn't into video gaming, rap music or anything Thompson 'morally opposes'. He said he was "amazed this guy wasn't disbared a long time ago." He filed suits and complaints with gay porn attached. He's filed suits and complaints with pictures replacing words. He's filed suits and complaints that were meant to insult the judge in the hopes that they would recuse themselves so he wouldn't get in more trouble than he already caused.

Before you start trying to defend an insane man, try reading what he's writing. The man is simply sleazy in his methods and disgusting in his attacks.

Personally I've never trusted anyone who rallys behind the war-cry "Who will think of the children!" Jack Thompson is just an attention seeking, self-gratifying tragedy chaser who uses other's suffering to futher his own career.