Slashdot Mirror
Supreme Court Rules Against Anti-Porn Law
Saeed al-Sahaf writes "From Fox News/AP, the Supreme Court has ruled that the COPA (Child Online Protection Act), passed in 1998 ostensibly to shield kids from Web porn, is probably an unconstitutional muzzle on free speech. This is not quite like 'striking the law down' because the court simply said a lower court was correct to block the law from taking effect, since it likely violates the First Amendment, and sent the law back to a lower court for trial. The American Civil Liberties Union and other critics of the antipornography law said that it would restrict far too much material that adults may legally see and buy, the court said."
With all of the new acts being put into place during our current Republican country, it is good to see something logical coming out of Washington these days (DC not Redmond). But, we still have the FCC. :(
GroupShares Inc. - A Free and Interactive Investment Community
-------
artlu.net
I know we have some porn site admins that post to slashdot. Maybe they can answer this question. Do you do it just to corrupt the youth of America, or do you just enjoy watching our moral guardians froth at the mouth? Obviously you can't be doing it for the money, because kids don't have any, and because you give so much of your content away for free, anyway.
Or is it that you actually want to sell your content to consenting adults, and the whole kids thing is a smokescreen thrown up by wannabe censors who don't want you to be able to do that, either?
--
E_NOSIG
unethical perverts???
shut up you puritanical bum, you have a kid so you had sex!
oohhh, never relised that you had SEX eh??? That's a dirt word i know.
P.S.: Next time you post, make sure that your brain is turned on. OK? Oh nevermind, You were probably just too busy burning some witches to make a coherent post.
You know, it's the self-righteous holier-,smarter-,and generally better-than-thou attitude of most leftists that generally nauseates me. As a libertarian (generally), I don't fit in really well with left or right, but at least those on the right are a bit more tolerable to be around.
Really? I guess you're hanging out in the wrong places then....
Or maybe you're just hanging out with people that have the same biases so they seem more tolerable?
It must be so lonely being the only intelligent person in the world.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Sex is about expressing love between a man and a woman in a marriage relationship. There is NOT ONE PIECE OF PORN EVER MADE that promotes this attitude. Not one. Pornography reduces sex to nothing more than an animal act.
Proper sexual expression leads to bonded couples and healthy families. Animalistic sex leads to broken hearts, divorce, adultery, shattered lives and emotional ruin.
This is so stunningly obvious that the only people who argue it are those who have become nothing more than dogs in heat.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Typical right-wing, brain-dead, bible-thumping, nazi-loving, witch-burning, gun-toting conservitive.
Leave the rest of us out of your rabbit hole please. There is absolutely nothing wrong with sex or nakedness. Nothing. Not for teenagers (for whom it was mainly intended anyway), not for "adults", and it has never been shown to be harmful to preteens either. Mostly they don't particularly care about it.
By the "illegal side of things" and "lives get ruined" and "alters senses of right and wrong", I would be curious to know what the fk you are referring to.
Has slashdot been invaded by Christian Jesus-freaks or something. Go jack off to a Jesus painting if you want or go molest some young boys, but leave the rest of us alone with your insane laws. Thanks.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
> People want porn because it triggers junk to squirt around in their brains that makes them feel good.
You mean, EXACTLY LIKE THE ADRENALINE THOSE SPORTS PLAYERS FEEL? People WATCHING sports certainly don't get any benefit from it, except, yes, it triggers junk (again, adrenaline, dopamine) to "squirt around in their brains." It does not teach the viewers anything useful. It does not, usually, show them the massive amounts of practice these players go through. It "shows" the viewer that by being born strong, they can make millions in sports. That is not the truth of it, but that's the image -- of course, true fans know what goes into becoming a very good team.
> people are designed to have these feelings with other people - not a monitor or TV.
Are you Catholic by any chance? I can argue that sex is designed to make babies -- not to have a good time, even with a very close friend (eg, your fiance/wife). If you do it for fun, or if you wear a condom, you are breaking the laws of nature -- it tricks your brain into thinking you're making a baby, but no, you evil bastard, you're going to throw that potential life into the sewer.
CONDOMS ARE NOT BIOLOGICAL EITHER, but are you claiming they should be illegal? If you are arguing porn should be illegal because it isn't natural, throw all your books that are printed with synthetic ink out the window and burn them. Own anything plastic? GONE. Got vinyl siding on your house? OOOOH, deliciously evil siding...
> Nature has chosen who gets to hook up with who and how often
What the hell are you talking about? How does nature select your mate???? What about bi- or homosexuals? Do you seriously believe these people are just perverts because they aren't using their willies in "the way nature intended" (IOW, the way YOU dictate)? You're a good candidate for fascism.