Not that this forum should become a discussion group on the subject of censorship, but I feel I must comment. "Indecency" is in the mind of the beholder. It's such a nebulous word that it could be used to to attack almost anything. At one point this bill had a provision in it which would have banned the distribution of information on abortion. I don't know if that amendment survived, but one could still call abortion "indecent", if that were your point of view, and an attack could be launched on that point as well. We don't need laws (and, yes, I realize I'm in Canada, but I'm an American in Canada) that have nebulous terms big enough to drive a truck through. Sure, it may be used today to ban the distribution of bomb making texts (which, by the way are perfectly legal), but could in the future be used to attack any diverging point of view. Isn't that what the Revolutionary War all about? *ALL* censorship is bad. There are all ready laws in the law books which deal with pornography. Why not let these laws work against what's already been deemed illegal and allow free speech to remain the cornerstone of The United States of America's democracy? Thomas Head