Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Utmost Certainty
Asking for a consistent definition of what’s considered ‘obscene’, is hardly using the language of the Left.

Yes it is. That is precisely the argument they used to overturn obscenity laws. But the argument is easily defeated by very simple definitions that I bet we could get 80% of the people to agree with.

If local communities want to arrive at a consensus about what’s obscene and what isn’t, that’s up to them. But this should absolutely not be the jurisdiction of the Federal Government to dictate for 300+ million people.

The internet assures that this most certainly IS a federal issue.
197 posted on 03/15/2012 1:45:08 PM PDT by Antoninus (The less virtuous a people, the greater its need for laws.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies ]


To: Antoninus
Yes it is. That is precisely the argument they used to overturn obscenity laws. But the argument is easily defeated by very simple definitions that I bet we could get 80% of the people to agree with.

If the laws were overturned, then apparently they aren't binding any longer and Santorum is either ignorant or lying.

The internet assures that this most certainly IS a federal issue.

No, it absolutely does not. Because of the Internet's decentralized structured, it can be filtered at many different levels of access if one so desires. You can filter content at the client-end on your own home computer, or within the local network for an entire building, or internet service providers can filter content themselves, etc. In no way whatever does the Federal Government need to be involved in this.
200 posted on 03/15/2012 1:56:11 PM PDT by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson