|
In Reply to: Re: about Maresha posted by Joseph on September 30, 2003 at 12:26:59:
yes, if a newspaper, say, did that in the UK, then they would be in trouble. But in the US, on the Internet...
There is the legal aspect of the act, but to me, it is more the ethical or moral aspect. Maresha was a victim, not an oppressor. Our generation should be going the extra mile to protect the victims, not to in any way revictimize them. I see Sam's mention of Maresha as essentially permanently re-victimizing her. I highly doubt that Maresha would consent to having her name splashed around in Sam's newsletter. And without her consent, does Sam have any right to do it?
If it was an isolated 'mistake,' that would be one thing. But his mindset on these issues is revealed in his comments to Jules, which I found particularly galling.
He said that he 'owned' her story. That if there was ever any evidence of any inappropriate behaviour on the part of her parents, in her personal family, he owned that story and claimed the right to publicise it, regardless of the wishes of the innocent people involved.
This is a really dangerous mindset that is almost guaranteed to continue to cause harm.
Oh well. Maybe he'll take it out. I know he has a hard time with me :), but it is not about me, or him, it is about doing what is right, and not hurting innocent people. We've all done far too much of that, except for you, as you have always been a systemite. :) Lucky for you.
