A Libertine Question (fwd)

[Alan Olsen]

At 12:18 AM 8/3/96 -0700, Cerridwyn Llewyellyn wrote:

>>>      As long as you are enforcing it on everyone, I don't think you'd
have a 
>>> problem, but to force some one from cooking food for homeless people, and 
>>> allow a family barbeque, is IMO wrong.
>>
>>Not at all. Businesses have no rights, individuals do. Businesses have a
><snip>
>>Blueberries they bought at the local HEB). Individuals have a right to
>>privacy, that includes cooking themselves food without harrassment. Business
>>on the other hand are selling products of potentialy questionable quality. A
>
>I disagree with your sentiments about Business and rights, however, in this
>instance, even that wasn't the issue. Food Not Bombs is NOT a business, it's
>a not-for-profit organization that gives out (not sells) food.  They are the
>same as, I think Tim May pointed out, a Boy Scout picnic, except for the 
>homless, not the boy scouts.

They are also Anarchists.  (They are referenced on various Anarchist web
pages, among other places.)

My personal belief is that they are being prosecuted because they bill
themselves as Anarchists and not for what they are doing.  If this has been
"Society Wives Against Hunger", there would have been no problems at all.
(And probibly commendations from the local paper and civic leaders.)

Locally, people who have billed themselves as Anarchists have been monitored
by the police, harased, and arrested.  (Remember: you only deserve the
protection of the state if you do not oppose the state.)

It seems that this country is quite willing to harrass fringe political
groups when the "powers that be" feel they can get away with it.  (Which is
quite often.)
---
Alan Olsen -- alano at teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
        `finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key 
                http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ 
  "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
                "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."