Free speech a right...just as long as it is popular speech - Page 2 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

Steve · #16 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slon

If she got her ideas from personally kidnapping and torturing children, then her writings would largely be non-issues (relatively speaking).

I don't know that they'd be "non-issues"; in fact, I think they could be used as damning evidence against her.

But, yeah, her writings would definitely be the least of her problems...

Slon · #17 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArmyFerret

I'm trying to dig up some stuff... Features - Constitutional, Federal and State Legal Definitions of Child Pornography, Obscenity and "Harmful to Minors" of Interest to California Libraries | LLRX.com

Federal law does not ban obscenity outright; it leaves this to state law. Federal statutes prohibit, among other things, the transmission of obscene matter as defined by state law, in interstate commerce (e.g. the Internet)

The Constitutional definition of Obscenity was further narrowed by the Supreme Court in Brockett v. Spokane Arcades, 472 U.S. 491, 498 (1985) which endorsed the Model Penal Code of obscenity -- "material whose predominant appeal is to a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion" and not "materials that provoked only normal sexual reactions." ... materials that have been judged obscene -- by a judge or a jury-- there are several common elements: explicit showing of excretion, bestiality, necrophilia, incest, or any type of non-consensual sex.

... so it's up to the state, and there's nothing specific about the type of media other than it is found to be obscene.

Sounds pretty oppressive.

John Drake · #18 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slon

Sounds pretty oppressive.

As one of the more prominent lawyers who specialize in obscenity cases has said, obscenity laws in the US are very much like having a stretch of highway where your speed limit is just a big sign with "?" on it. Yet another example of how "limited government" and "leaving it up to the states" always guarantees justice.

solletica · #19 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008

Freedom of speech, along with every other Amendment in the Constitution, only represents an ideal but for practical purposes isn't automatically guaranteed for everyone, especially not those who have little or no $$ (since they can't afford a real lawyer).

It's like I always said--many times in this forum--individual freedom is not something that's automatic in any country--you have to be vigilant in acquiring it for yourself, either by making enough $$ to be able to defend it, or by employing illicit means (i. e. encryption) to protect it.

To those who do neither, the Constitution is, in practice, nothing more than an old piece of paper.

Steve · #20 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by solletica

It's like I always said--many times in this forum--individual freedom is not something that's automatic in any country--you have to be vigilant in acquiring it for yourself, either by making enough $$ to be able to defend it, or by employing illicit means (i. e. encryption) to protect it.

That's flawed because, in both instances, you'll already have it...

daddio · #21 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slon

Donora woman's child torture stories get her house arrest - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

So, if "acting on" a certain written material would result in illegal and greatly harmful actions, said material should be banned and the writer thereof should be punished? Well, shit, I guess we better ban every movie that contains violence, rape, murder, etc...

Better put Senator Webb on house arrest as well.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode