http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/commentary/sexdrive/2007/10/sexdrive_1019

friggin' gov't

http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/commentary/sexdrive/2007/10/sexdrive_1019

friggin' gov't



As Loren Bacall said in the movie "My Fellow Americans",

"Don't say 'friggin'. If you are going to use the 'F' word-go for the gold".  ;) :D ;D ;D


Anyway, I do agree with you. FUCKIN' gov't.



Cat

Oh, brother....

Stupid stuff for the government to screw with...

Skimmed the article, read the comments. Here's something that's happening a lot of: "The simple answer is to move their hosting to a site outside the US."
- which is probably what will just happen (look at torrent sites - the US government can't do shit 'cause they're all based in European countries).

Let's just say: I'm so fucking glad right now that I'm a New Zealander, not an American.  8)

"George Carlin quipped that politicians love to hide behind three things: the flag, the Bible, and your children. Here's a case where they've got all three stacked up in front of them. After all, what patriotic, God-fearing American parent could possibly argue with throwing the book at people for not suppressing their own sexuality?

I think the purpose of this legislation is to shut down the sexual networking sites so that everyday Americans are forced to abandon their online sex lives and go seek out sex in airport restrooms, where the lawmakers are waiting"

LMAO.

I can see where 2257 is to keep porn above board for producers, but extending it to every nude pic on the net? The War on Porn will be even less successful than the War on Drugs.

Ant



Yes, and it will be deservingly so.

As Loren Bacall said in the movie "My Fellow Americans",

"Don't say 'friggin'. If you are going to use the 'F' word-go for the gold".  ;) :D ;D ;D


Anyway, I do agree with you. FUCKIN' gov't.



Cat

Or as Lennie Bruce said, "If you can't say FUCK, you can't say FUCK the government!"

Don't worry, this law cannot pass constitutional muster.  The sixth circuit court already found it unconstitutional for First Amendment overbreadth. 

The vague and unworkable terms of the proposed law amount to prior restraint on the First Amendment.  Since the law makes no distinction between private and commercial production, it requires YOU to document naked pictures of the missus or the old man, which in turn would permit the government to raid private residences, a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment.

On the other hand, the Roberts Court is gearing up to thrown the Bill of Rights out the window, sooooo......
:o

This law only applies to "producers," but not to those who merely possess pornographic images.  On the other hand, if the law were to pass, you might have to prove to the government that YOU didn't personally produce any of the pornographic images in your hard drive or sock drawer of whatever.
::)

BTW, Bill O'Reilly endorses this law.  Surprise surprise. 

Libertarians will not support this bill.  Constitutional conservatives will not support this bill.  This is a Christofascist's wet dream.  It is a roundabout route to outright pornography prohibition.  Pornography is so common, pervasive, and accepted among the general public that porn prohibition would be like alcohol prohibition in the 1920s.  That's right, we would have the Al Capone of porn!

I didn't know that they could have wet dreams...

:D