Posted on 07/14/2004 7:46:19 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
A requirement of something being considered obscene is that it be "patently offensive." When a substantial percentage of Americans are doing something, it is probably not patently offensive.
And who is this we? You and President Bush? Yeah, your fear of someone looking at porn appears to be really big on his list.
Twelve jurors acquitted OJ, so he got away with murder.
It's not jury nullification. It's simply a jury deciding that porn is not "patently offensive."
I think there is a small fetish group for food. I guess now you are the president of it. ;-)
Ooh, rape is down 60%. Well, geez, so is smoking. Now what? And who said porn was up? I guess you just assumed that, huh? Is violent porn up, or porn in general?
My post dealt with the assumption (from the author) that porn was tied to rape. My point was that if it were true, then legalizing porn would lead to increased rapes.
Given that, I'd rather arrest the pornographer before the fact than the rapist after the fact.
I'm not interested in getting into a pi$$ing contest on statistics.
The majority of Americans would find your Hustler magazines offensive.
Yeah, I oppose the War on Drugs, because it's turned into the War on the Fourth Amendment.
I once tried to give up drinking for a friend of mine when I was a Marine. He died of alcoholism-induced liver damage.
Re: prostitution and selling human organs:
Outlawing prostitution: it hasn't made a dent in the availability of prostitution. It has, however, enabled police forces across the country to supplement their income with kickbacks for not noticing those outlets of prostitution that make their payments on time. I've given up on saving people from themselves; they usually aren't very grateful, and it winds up causing more trouble than it's worth.
Re: sale of human organs: if they're my own, and I'm the one selling them, what business is it of yours? I think that a supply-and-demand approach (i.e., money into donor's pockets) is likely to resolve the shortage of organ donations.
Ooohh Name calling... How liberal of you. I guess that is in alignment with your definitions of "Adult" and "Responsible".
To clarify my last closing line, 1) you have the freedom to whine all you want, and 2) I have the right to vote my concience.
On the filp side, you should know that the content, structure, and conviction of your argument has convinced me to become much more evagalistic on this issue. I hope that was your intent.
Best of Luck...
Perhaps we should take a lesson from that, then.
That is the inherent risk of a free society.
So, District Attorney Tailgunner Joe, you've made case after case against the EEE-vil pornographer. Juries have refused to convict him.
What next? What do you propose to do?
The hell we can't.
Legally, you can't. If something is not obscene, it is legal to produce. Therefore, paying actors to perform in the production is also legal. The reason prosecutors don't try this move is because they know they'd be laughed out of court.
Think of it this way- the 2nd Amendment recognizes the right to bear arms. Could the government make an end-run around this right by outlawing the production of firearms?
The statistics on rapes come from the Justice Department. The Ashcroft Justice Department, by the way.
As for porn being more mainstream, I don't know how anyone can deny that.
You don't need to prove anything, unless you want to insist that porn "causes" rapes. That was the clear message I got from a prior post of yours, but I am willing to admit that I may well be mistaken.
So let's clear the air - I do not believe that there is a connection between access to porn and propensity to rape. I have seen no evidence to support that position, and plenty to contradict it.
Do you believe that porn causes rape?
If that was the case, prosecutors would have a better conviction rate in obscenity trials.
What makes you think the age of consent is gonna remain 18? They are already pushing for 12.
Administration wages war on pornography - 06 Apr 04Like I said, the only hope for you porn-addicted leftist radicals is to vote Ashcroft and the "Christian Taliban" out of the White House and get another deviant lesbian like Janet Reno in charge.In a speech in 2002, Ashcroft made it clear that the Justice Department intends to try. He said pornography "invades our homes persistently though the mail, phone, VCR, cable TV and the Internet," and has "strewn its victims from coast to coast."
"Just about everything on the Internet and almost everything in the video stores and everything in the adult bookstores is still prosecutable illegal obscenity"
"Some of the cable versions of porno movies are prosecutable. Once it becomes obvious that this really is a federal felony instead of just a form of entertainment or investment, then legitimate companies, to stay legitimate, are going to have to distance themselves from it."
Obscenity cases came to a standstill under Janet Reno, President Bill Clinton's attorney general, who focused on child pornography, which is considered child abuse and comes under different criminal statutes. The ensuing years saw an explosion of porn, so much so that critics say that Americans' tolerance for sexually explicit material rivals that of Europeans.
The law is not being enforced.
I asked you earlier, and you have yet to provide the laws that are being violated. Please provide them.
And maybe you should move to the paradise of Alabama where the sale and possession of devices for the manual stimiulation of gentalia is illegal.
Evangelize all you want. Convince people they should not partake of porn. But do not take away their right to do so if they should so choose.
And you claimed to be for "family values."
What a liar and a fraud you are.
We have to give them credit for learning from the liberals --what you can't win by the will of the people, look to the courts (or jury) for your victories.
Jury nullification is big with the libertarians anarchists on the drug threads. They'd like to make it mandatory for every judge to read it to every jury -- like a Miranda warning: "You have the right to free this scumbag drug dealer if you don't like our drug laws" type of thing.
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel? Nope. Jury nullification is.
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.