Amen!  I don't want the government to have any more information than is
absolutely necessary to achieve a lawful purpose; and even in that case, I want
them to have to make an effort to get it.  Some people say, "If you care so much
about privacy, you must have something to hide."  My response is, "Unless you
have hard evidence that I've done something wrong, then EVERYTHING -- no matter
how innocent -- should remain hidden if I so choose."  And I choose not to tell
the government anything I don't have to tell them.

Wayne




Jim Phillips <[log in to unmask]> on 06/07/2000 06:42:05 AM

Please respond to Jim Phillips <[log in to unmask]>

To:   [log in to unmask]
cc:    (bcc: Wayne Brown/Corporate/Altec)

Subject:  [HP3000-L] OT: Eugene sighting, going wildly off topic...



Nick Demos <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> Interesting but:
>

<snip>

> 3.  The government, research organizations need information to better
>     serve.  I think the objection to certain census information was
>     absurd.

Those of use who are quite tired of seeing our individual freedoms eroded
bit by bit are also against governmental intrusion regardless of whatever
good reason is behind it.  The constitutional basis for the census provides
only for an enumeration for a specific purpose: the allocation of federal
representatives.  The census was never intended to be a tool for allocating
socialistic government benefits or "entitlements".  As such, the only valid
question on a census form is "How many people live here?".

Jim Phillips (My opinions, not anybody else's, should be obvious by now)

"Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free."
 - John F. Kennedy