[GSHastings]

I'm much less bothered by pornography than I am by the prospect of the Government deciding what people can and cannot read.

The issue is not "government" deciding what people can and cannot read.

The issue is if people in a community deciding for the government what they want to allow to be pervasive in their environment. And to use THEIR government to enforce their desires.

It's an absolute red herring that all forms of censorship are somehow extremely dangerous to the rights of the people. The opposite is true. It is needed to protect the rights of people.

[budwiesest]

But some forms might be. Yet, as you say a particular community has the right to decide which censorship it wishes to embrace in it's attempt to reduce harm to it's citizens. FRankly, the boob with pastie, displayed amongst the 'community' of 19 million football viewers was out of line. Not to mention the bump-and-grind preceding it, nor the crotch grabbing before that, and the treatment of our flag, as well.

The answer would have been to have each and every person associated with this half-time production mortaging their homes to pay fines for their breach of faith contract that viewers expect from a professional sporting event.

This was no-less than a bait-and-switch event. When I want to see breasts or simulated sex acts I'll not be tuning into a football game. If I said I was going to build a pool for you and put a roof on your house instead, you'd have plenty of reason to complain.