Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SunStar
Distasteful or not, the ONLY factor in this decision should be whether there is injury to children.

I wouldn't go with that argument. There are all too many people who believe that facilitating injury or the potential to commit injury is equally criminal. I've already heard it said by those who normally are very studious and discerning on issues of constitutional law, that even virtual porn fosters lust and can thereby lead to sexual assualt.

That's blurring the lines to an unacceptable degree in my opinion. It's becoming my unofficial motto: Liberty can be abridged to an endless extent if we want to base laws on "what if."

47 posted on 04/17/2002 10:01:10 AM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]


To: tdadams
...even virtual porn fosters lust and can thereby lead to sexual assualt.

So, then you support increased government intervention by making all pornography illegal to possess? What happened to the pro-freedom argument? And, is "fostering lust" illegal? I think not.

68 posted on 04/17/2002 11:23:37 AM PDT by SunStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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