Posted on 09/30/2004 1:56:48 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
There isn't a single avowed atheist in any three branches of the federal government, yet we have the most unconstitutional government in history. Funny, that...
No, it's my nightmare.
It is a shibbloeth conjured by your fevered paranoia.
Yes it is, but only because of people like the author. As long as he, or a small group, or even the overwhelming majority feels entitled to define "obscenity".
Give it a rest!
I appreciate and don't disagree with your objectives but you will never convince me that anyone has the right to tell an adult what he or she can read or see. I don't support obscenity or porn and porn involving those too young or incapacitated to give informed consent is obviouly illegal on contract law terms but free people are, well, free to choose what they want to read or see. If it's porn well, that's the downside of freedom
Congratulations on your work! Your pride that you are helping to put these evil predators of children out of business and in jail is well-earned and well-deserved.
When you give the government the power to determine what is and isn't pornography, you're taking the short end of a very long bet.
If you love the war on drugs--no-knock raids, property seizure on mere accusation of wrongdoing, et cetera--then you're gonna LOVE the war on porn. One .jpeg file of a nekkid woman--quite possibly put on your computer without your knowledge while you were on the Internet--and the cops can seize everything you own. Great idea.
This subject is one of TJ's favorites. He posts to it fairly regularly.
"Pornography is not "speech." Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment."
I see. Since what is considered "obscene" is open for interpretation what do you plan to do when a future liberal legislature decides that religious teaching is "obscene" and bans it?
You realize that many liberals already consider the bible to be "obscene" don't you? They would ban it in a heartbeat if they thought they could.
Thankfully the courts don't seem in them mood to ban much of anything these days, so I think both you and the liberals are out of luck/
That's answered in the article : "3. It is inevitable that the law will codify and teach moral values not shared by some portion of the society -- usually a minority."
Some look to the law to guide their behavior -- they have no internal concept of morality.
It's your side who wants to send in the people with guns, and put people in jail.
Let's try to use language like "force" properly.
The government exists to keep others from denying us our rights, not to tell us what we can, or cannot read. If it isn't hurting anyone but the user, and he or she is aware of the danger, what business is it of yours to stick your nose in and tell them they can't do it?
It already has this power.
If you love the war on drugs--no-knock raids, property seizure on mere accusation of wrongdoing, et cetera--then you're gonna LOVE the war on porn.
Well I certainly won't concede defeat in the war on drugs like you have. If you don't like asset forfeiture laws then abolish them. You go further, aligning yourself with narco gangsters to destroy society. Conservatives stand in your way.
There's such a thing as federal and state obscenity...?
Geez, organized crime's association with the liquor trade ended when Prohibition did. What makes you think legalizing drugs won't have the same effect?
According to who? You?
Excuse me, but who died and made you King of Constitutional Interpretation?
Your problem is with Congress, not the Constitution.
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.