Court Defends America's Right to Online Smut

[Selena_Kitt]

Nice title isn't it?

But it's an interesting article.

If this passes, it will be quite a scary thing.

 

[KLCK]

That is terrifying. How in the living hell will they enforce this? Theres millions upon millions of people who cannot be traced through the internet posting what these people define as "smut" (basically to them that means anything even vaugly sexual).

I think there should just be the same old classical warning stating that this or that site is for people over 18. If a kid is caught looking at the site, punish the parents for not watching what there kid is looking at. Dont punish the absoloutly massive community for excersizing free speeach.

Porn industry will crash over night!

 

[desertslave]

This attempted legislation continues to be absurd. It's the government trying, once again, to presume that they know how to run our lives better than we, as individuals, do. Parents need to take responsibility for "censoring" their own children, the government should not censor all of us.

 

[KLCK]

Its official, the nation must be refreshed with the the blood of patriots and tyrants. Cmon everyone, grab your weapons and meet up. Were going to Washington DC to take back the white house!

NYYYYYAAAAAWWWWWW

Hyper conservative legislature slways scares me but then again I dont think its going to pass. The only restriction upon free speach should be not being allowed to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

In an interesting sidebar, I heard about a case where a strip club in Sarasota (I think) was taken to court for public indecency, which by law must violate "community standards" of decency, always a tough thing to determine.

To find out what the community standards for decency were, the defense got Yahoo search records for "Sex Orgies" for Sarasota for a single month, and of course there were something like a kazillion hits. Based on that, the judge decided that the strip club did not violate community standards for decency in Sarasota and threw the case out.

 

[KLCK]

In an interesting sidebar, I heard about a case where a strip club in Sarasota (I think) was taken to court for public indecency, which by law must violate "community standards" of decency, always a tough thing to determine.

To find out what the community standards for decency were, the defense got Yahoo search records for "Sex Orgies" for Sarasota for a single month, and of course there were something like a kazillion hits. Based on that, the judge decided that the strip club did not violate community standards for decency in Sarasota and threw the case out.

Oh WOW. I bet that made some neighbors look at each other funny lol. Then again I am sure most communities except some small little villages are like that. I wonder if someone could rate a communities "standards" based on number of orgies/swinger clubs/munches in that area.

 

[john-the-author]

In an interesting sidebar, I heard about a case where a strip club in Sarasota (I think) was taken to court for public indecency, which by law must violate "community standards" of decency, always a tough thing to determine.

To find out what the community standards for decency were, the defense got Yahoo search records for "Sex Orgies" for Sarasota for a single month, and of course there were something like a kazillion hits. Based on that, the judge decided that the strip club did not violate community standards for decency in Sarasota and threw the case out.

Haw haw haw haw haw!

I always liked, uh, Lenny Bruce's(?) observation that pornography was whatever gave the judge a hard-on. The Babe, a judge, doesn't think that's so fuckin' funny.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

The government has no business telling me what I can and what I can't read or look at on the web. It is my responsibility to keep my child or children from viewing anything I deem detrimental to their well being.

Of course there are those parents that don't or are unwilling to do this and thus look to the government to babysit for them.

 

[DeeZire]

Communist China is big on regulating the internet. Likewise the Taliban. This issue is seriously stressing my relationship with faux conservatism. I think I need to spend the whole weekend watching Christian television. Anybody want to loan me a couple of Qualudes?

 

[rgraham666]

After that you won't need any. You'll be flatlined.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Yeah, this is crazy. I wonder how they think they're "protecting children" anyhow. Like is seeing people screwing lethal? Does the sight of a tit make you go blind? If you see someone getting blown, do you suddenly want to kill people with a chain saw?

Just what's the connection here?

 

[TE999]

"No one expects the Spanish Inquisition..."

Seriously, this an excellent example of good intentions turned bad. This act doesn't have a snowballs chance in a blast furnace of becoming law, but there are idiot people out there that are outraged about all sorts of things, but unwilling to take control of their lives themselves.

Thinking like this, or lack of same is, how the likes of Facisim, Religious Totalitarianisim and National Socialisim gain a foothold in a country.

Keep an eye on the horizon and your powder dry.

 

[KLCK]

Keep an eye on the horizon and your powder dry.

"When all else fails, vote from the rooftops!"

lol

 

[Edward Teach]

A lawyer friend who is considered by his peers to be an expert on the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 14th amendments, told me that if you are approached online by an underage person, or about anything else illegal these days, the odds are that you are talking to the FBI or one of their informants. He was very concerned about it.

 

[JagFarlane]

-sigh- This vaguely reminds me of a new law that Virginia put into place. As of July 1st this year, it is now illegal for two people to have sex, unless they are married. WTF? I almost guarantee most of the people whom passed this law, would be guilty of having violated it in the past. How the hell do you enforce this? Especially when you consider, many of the police officers whom would have to enforce this, would previously be guilty, or are currently breaking this law. Who the hell comes up with that!?
"Dude, I got arrested last night." "What did you do!?" "Had sex with my girlfriend."

 

[Selena_Kitt]

A lawyer friend who is considered by his peers to be an expert on the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 14th amendments, told me that if you are approached online by an underage person, or about anything else illegal these days, the odds are that you are talking to the FBI or one of their informants. He was very concerned about it.

The only underage people I talk to on the Internet are my own kids.

 

[TE999]

A lawyer friend who is considered by his peers to be an expert on the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 14th amendments, told me that if you are approached online by an underage person, or about anything else illegal these days, the odds are that you are talking to the FBI or one of their informants. He was very concerned about it.

I don't necessarily condone or sanction these methods, but anyone who indulges in such activities deserves gettin' their ass burned.

Just sayin'.

 

[Elianna]

Yeah, this is crazy. I wonder how they think they're "protecting children" anyhow. Like is seeing people screwing lethal? Does the sight of a tit make you go blind? If you see someone getting blown, do you suddenly want to kill people with a chain saw?

Just what's the connection here?

I believe that we should shelter our children from porn, not because I think porn is bad, but because they don't have the maturity and ability to process it yet. Their brains are sill "mushy" in places... which is why teenagers are so unpredictable. Do I think it will make them murders; no. But have you ever looked at the statistic of children who are molested? They tend to molest when they are adults. The lines of propriety are skewed in their minds. I wouldn't want my children's lines of propriety and thoughts about sex to be skewed as they get older. Boundaries are hard to set when you've never had them. That's my personal opinion. When they're mature enough to handle it, then they're welcome to it. However, I would shelter my kids by...

*gasp*

watching them myself when they're on the internet. Or getting a filter. Or... being a responsible parent.

The only underage people I talk to on the Internet are my own kids.

A VERY good rule.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I would shelter my kids by...

*gasp*

watching them myself when they're on the internet. Or getting a filter. Or... being a responsible parent.

What a brilliant idea!

Why didn't the lawmakers think of that?

 

[keeblercrumb]

Rocket Man

I don't necessarily condone or sanction these methods, but anyone who indulges in such activities deserves gettin' their ass burned.

Just sayin'.

If it is ass burning you want, then the methods of entrapment, vague legislation and impossibly naive concepts of teenage sexuality should not bother you at all.

Our society has gone way off the deep end on this issue. The onset of sexuality is what defines adolescence. Attempting to control consensual sex through the use of utterly arbitrary ages such as "18" which do not acknowledge developmental reality, it is patently absurd.


-KC

 

[rgraham666]

Well we human beings are nothing if not absurd.

 

[keeblercrumb]

Rocket Man

Well we human beings are nothing if not absurd.

True.... Maybe we should use "absurd" when attempting to define humans to begin with.



-KC

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I believe that we should shelter our children from porn, not because I think porn is bad, but because they don't have the maturity and ability to process it yet. Their brains are sill "mushy" in places... which is why teenagers are so unpredictable. Do I think it will make them murders; no. But have you ever looked at the statistic of children who are molested? They tend to molest when they are adults. The lines of propriety are skewed in their minds. I wouldn't want my children's lines of propriety and thoughts about sex to be skewed as they get older. Boundaries are hard to set when you've never had them. That's my personal opinion. When they're mature enough to handle it, then they're welcome to it. However, I would shelter my kids by...

*gasp*

watching them myself when they're on the internet. Or getting a filter. Or... being a responsible parent.



A VERY good rule.

What does being molested have to do with being exposed to porn or not?

Believe me, if they're old enough to use the internet, they know all about porn. And not only that, they see it at friends' houses, they hear it on the radio, they see it on TV, in the movies. It's not hurting them.

What's so bad if you find out what people do sexually when you're eight years old? You find out about people killing each other at a much younger age and that doesn't seem to hurt you. How come knowing people give blow jobs is so detrimental to young, impressionable minds?

 

[TheeGoatPig]

Believe me, if they're old enough to use the internet, they know all about porn. And not only that, they see it at friends' houses, they hear it on the radio, they see it on TV, in the movies. It's not hurting them.

What's so bad if you find out what people do sexually when you're eight years old? You find out about people killing each other at a much younger age and that doesn't seem to hurt you. How come knowing people give blow jobs is so detrimental to young, impressionable minds?

My nephew is 4 and has been on the internet since he was almost 2. He only plays games, but still, he's out there, and I hope not seeing any porn.

 

[cantdog]

"No one expects the Spanish Inquisition..."

Seriously, this an excellent example of good intentions turned bad. <snip>

I doubt that. I can't suspend enough disbelief to agree that their intentions were in any way good. What exactly was it that gave you that impression? They intended to control other people for their own purposes, without those people's consent. Where's the virtue in that?

The Internet generates pixels in color patterns on a screen. Nothing in that can harm anyone. Pixels are small, but they can't choke on them. Audio content can be turned off easily, usually with little or no degradation of the experience, and often to its improvement.