Posted on 07/13/2004 10:11:42 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
Do you ever wonder why the internet is so polluted with pornography? The Supreme Court just reminded us why: it blocks every attempt by Congress to regulate the pornographers.
From its ivory tower, the Court props open the floodgates for smut and graphic sex. Over the past five years, it has repeatedly found new constitutional rights for vulgarity, most recently invalidating the Child Online Protection Act (COPA).
This latest judicial outrage happened on the final day of the Supreme Court term, after which the justices headed out for a long summer break. Lacking teenaged children of their own, the justices closed their eyes to electronic obscenity polluting our children's minds.
For decades, pornographers have enjoyed better treatment by our courts than any other industry. The justices have constitutionally protected obscenity in libraries, filth over cable television, and now unlimited internet pornography.
The flood of pornography started with the Warren Court when it handed down 34 decisions between 1966 and 1970 in favor of the smut peddlers. In mostly one-sentence decisions that were issued anonymously (the justices were too cowardly to sign them), the Court overturned every attempt by communities to maintain standards of decency.
The judges' obsession with smut is astounding. Even though five Supreme Court justices were appointed by Presidents Reagan and the first Bush, graphic sex wins judicial protection in essentially every case.
Woe to those who transgress an obscure environmental law, or say a prayer before a football game, or run a political ad within two months of an election. They find no judicial sympathy, as courts now routinely restrict private property rights and censor political speech.
But the pornographers can do no wrong in the eyes of our top justices. The most explicit sex can be piped into our home computers and the Supreme Court prevents our democratically elected officials from doing anything about it.
COPA was enacted by Congress in response to the Court's invalidation of the predecessor law, the Communications Decency Act of 1996. But decency lost again when six justices knocked out COPA in Ashcroft v. ACLU.
COPA was badly needed, as filth plagues the internet, incites sex crimes, and entraps children. COPA banned the posting for "commercial purposes" on the World Wide Web of material that is "patently offensive" in a sexual manner unless the poster takes reasonable steps to restrict access by minors.
You don't need to look very far to find a tragic crime traceable to the internet. In New Jersey in 1997, 15-year-old Sam Manzie, who had fallen prey to homosexual conduct prompted by the internet, sexually assaulted and murdered 11-year-old Eddie Werner, who was selling candy door-to-door.
COPA did not censor a single word or picture. Instead, it merely required the purveyors of sex-for-profit to screen their websites from minors, which can be done by credit card or other verification.
But minors are an intended audience for the highly profitable sex industry. Impressionable teenagers are most easily persuaded to have abortions, and homosexual clubs in high school are designed for the young.
Justice Kennedy declared it unconstitutional for Congress to stop porn flowing to teens, shifting the burden to families to screen out the graphic sex rather than imposing the cost on the companies profiting from the filth. His reasoning is as absurd as telling a family just to pull down its window shades if it doesn't want to see people exposing themselves outside.
In a prior pro-porn decision, Kennedy cited Hollywood morals as a guide for America, but this time he relied on the prevalence of foreign pornography. "40% of harmful-to-minors content comes from overseas," he declared in holding that the other 60% of obscenity is wrapped in the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court insisted that individual internet users should buy filters to try to block the vulgarity. Should those who do not like air pollution be told to buy air masks?
The Supreme Court protects pornography in books, movies, cable television, and the internet, real or simulated, against all citizens' clean-up efforts. The Court is no longer the blindfolded lady weighing a controversy, but is dominated by media-driven supremacists forcing us down into a moral sewer.
This latest pro-porn decision was too much even for Clinton-appointed Justice Breyer. He said, "Congress passed the current statute in response to the Court's decision" invalidating the prior law; "what else was Congress supposed to do?"
The solution to these ills foisted on us by judicial supremacists is for Congress to exercise its constitutional powers to remove jurisdiction from the federal courts over pornography. The Court has abused its power, and it's Congress's duty to end the judicial abuse.
Which law would that be? In which clause or article of the Constitution did the authors and representatives of the states give over to Congress the power to control and/or prohibit pornography in their state?
You perform self-exposure just fine on your own. Your bias has you blind to your dishonesty. It's so transparent.
The law permits abortion, therefore, women truly do have the "right" to choose.
Or maybe the law is wrong sometimes?
The Tenth amendment for starters.
Unlike you, of course, who has done ZERO but call others "whores", "anarchists", etc., and have given NO justification or evidence for your own mad assertions, like the one about Christians being the only ones who will liberate Iran.
Watch out for those strippers, Joe...they're leading you astray!!
"And now, O sons, listen to me, and do not depart from the words of my mouth. Keep your way far from her, and do not go near the door of her house, lest you give your honor to others and your years to the merciless, lest aliens take their fill of your wealth, and your labors go to the house of a foreigner."...[Proverbs 5:1-10]
Should women be allowed to sell their murdered fetuses?
You defend whoredom. I'm simply pointing out this fact. It's no smear.
All attempts to delude the people, or to abuse their understanding by exercise of the pretended arts of witchcraft, conjuration, inchantment, or sorcery or by pretended prophecies, shall be punished by ducking and whipping at the discretion of a jury, not exceeding 15. stripes.
Thomas Jefferson, A Bill for Proportioning Crimes and Punishments
Spot on - let's follow that one as well !
Sure. Guys like you are NEVER around when the butcher's bill comes due. Just like other fanatics...like Arafat, bin Laden, etc...somehow, when the battle starts, they dissappear and send others to die or be killed.
Sell it to someone else.
I suppose someone could use murder or rape as a form of speech, but those activities could still be restricted. That's because murder, rape, and threats of violence violate the rights of individuals. Your right to free speech does not extend to violating the rights of others.
However, a porno violates no one's rights, so it can't be compared to murder or rape.
I'm pointing out the fact that you're a fascistic statist. No smear.
Murder and rape are not speech or the press.
Construing actions as 'speech' is another of the evils of interpreting the Constitution.
So9
I never think about porn unless and until I notice a FR thread about it.
The Tenth amendment for starters.
Congratulations, Joe! You just failed Constitutional Law 101, unless you're a flaming liberal who thinks that the Tenth Amendment grants enormous power to the Federal government at the expense of the several states.
You use the word fascist the way a commie does.
Gee, Joe, with your debating tactics, I don't know what I'll do...
"You use the word fascist the way a commie does."
ROFLMAO!!!!
No. The fetus is not part of their body, it is a unique human.
Considering the article is about the USSC striking down a federal law, I think that's a pretty fair assesment.
Oh, but it violates THEIR "rights" to be free of temptation. Y'see, because THEY doubt themselves in the presence of smut, OTHERS who can must be punished.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.