PDA

View Full Version : Ashcroft wants to take away your pr0n



topane
02-22-2002, 09:21 AM
Via wired.com (http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,44398,00.html):

WASHINGTON -- Look out, Internet sextrepreneurs: John Aschroft wants you to serve hard time.

In explicit terms, the attorney general told Congress this week that hardcore sex sites would no longer be selling peeks at balloon-breasted babes.

"I am concerned about obscenity and I'm concerned about obscenity as it relates to our children," Ashcroft said in his first appearance before the House Judiciary Committee.

He said Justice Department prosecutors would help state officials imprison sex-site operators that feature obscene images: "We try to be especially accommodating to local law enforcement to assist them, and I would think that would be an objective of ours in this respect."

A number of Republicans asked Ashcroft to pledge to prosecute raunch and ribaldry, but Rep. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia -- who also, unbelievably, is co-chair of the Internet Caucus -- was the most persistent.

"The failure of the (Clinton) administration to enforce those laws has led to a proliferation of obscenity, both online and off," Goodlatte said. "And I am particularly concerned about the safety of our children on the Internet, where they're subjected to child pornography and solicitation in a massive way."

Asked Goodlatte: "I'd like to know to what extent the Justice Department will use its resources to assist state and local enforcement in combating this cyberattack on our nation's children."

Goodlatte was also a big fan of the Communications Decency Act, which the Supreme Court tossed out in 1997 as an affront to free speech.

Obscenity, which the Supreme Court ruled is not protected by the First Amendment, is textual or graphical material that appeals to someone's "prurient interest," runs afoul of local community standards, and lacks any literary, artistic, political or scientific value. I like how he worked in that it's Clinton's fault. :rolleyes:

BigJon
02-22-2002, 09:22 AM
NNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jase71
02-22-2002, 09:48 AM
Ashcroft apparently doesn't have a clue how the internet works.

All this will do is push hardcore sites to hosts outside the US.
The same pages will be available, but they'll be hosted by servers in Asia, or Canada, or Mexico, or anywhere where Ashcroft can't reach.

DoPeY5007
02-22-2002, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by BigJon
NNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :stupid:



NNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

whitak24
02-22-2002, 09:56 AM
well, i have a feeling this effort will have the same end result as the CDA that Goodlatte (is he a spokesman for starbucks? :P) championed

Grimm
02-22-2002, 10:02 AM
Why are all the politicians in office now so against freedom?

Think about it, to them "Choice" is a bad word!

ironchef
02-22-2002, 10:17 AM
the only problem with porn is the blind solicitation. legislate harder on that, either via understandable and enforceable spam laws or with mandatory ratings systems, and the exposure they're so worried about for the kids goes away.

alternatively, :eek:, teach their own friggin children the difference between right and wrong and stop looking for others to do so for 'em.

Slutzy
02-22-2002, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by ironchef
the only problem with porn is the blind solicitation. legislate harder on that, either via understandable and enforceable spam laws or with mandatory ratings systems, and the exposure they're so worried about for the kids goes away.

alternatively, :eek:, teach their own friggin children the difference between right and wrong and stop looking for others to do so for 'em.

Now I don't mean to get off on a rant here.....

But as hard as it is, I have to agree with chef on this one. The only beef i or anyone should have with the porn industry is the blatant spamming that goes on via email and im services like icq.

This is a free country. I find it hard to believe that the same politicians <ahem-republicans-cough> that say campaign finance reform violates free speech rights can legitimately say people do not have the right to pick and choose what they look at in the privacy of their own home. And aren't these the same people preaching family values? Then they should be true to their word and trust families to take the necessary steps to ensure their children are not looking at smut in their free time.

Of course that's just my opinion--i could be wrong.

hoey222
02-22-2002, 11:01 AM
"....and lacks any literary, artistic, political or scientific value. "


awwww come on - there's plenty of scientific value in pr0n


:heh:


:hihi:

aglio412
02-22-2002, 11:04 AM
he can have it, i'm tired of my current collection...fresh start might be good for me

Nanotech9
02-22-2002, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by Slutzy


Now I don't mean to get off on a rant here.....

But as hard as it is, I have to agree with chef on this one. The only beef i or anyone should have with the porn industry is the blatant spamming that goes on via email and im services like icq.

This is a free country. I find it hard to believe that the same politicians <ahem-republicans-cough> that say campaign finance reform violates free speech rights can legitimately say people do not have the right to pick and choose what they look at in the privacy of their own home. And aren't these the same people preaching family values? Then they should be true to their word and trust families to take the necessary steps to ensure their children are not looking at smut in their free time.

Of course that's just my opinion--i could be wrong.

i agree with chef also.

Nija
02-22-2002, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by aglio412
he can have it, i'm tired of my current collection...fresh start might be good for me

:stupid:

I'm with you aglio... my collection is getting kind of lame... I could use a fresh new, hardcore collection... this 6 gigs is getting old :naughty:

molecularfire
02-22-2002, 12:49 PM
What ashcroft should get rid of is those stupid pop-up windows with porn on them when you go to a NON-PORN site. Personally, I don't like to be forced to watch porn.

sbp
02-22-2002, 12:53 PM
http://sbp777.homestead.com/files/Lady_justice.jpg

ironchef
02-22-2002, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by sbp
http://sbp777.homestead.com/files/Lady_justice.jpgbahahaha! good one, sbp ;)

leemaj
02-22-2002, 03:52 PM
Obscenity, which the Supreme Court ruled is not protected by the First Amendment, is textual or graphical material that appeals to someone's "prurient interest," runs afoul of local community standards, and lacks any literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

i learned about this....the only way u can get rid of porn is if it violates ur local standards...so there would have to be different filters for different parts of the country....i hope this just gets tossed aside....so what if something is raunchy? i may not like it, but if there is someone who does, then they can look at it.

Speedfreak
02-22-2002, 09:34 PM
"They can take our Porn, but they'll never take our (G/A?)Freedom!!!!"

http://www.magicdragon.com/Wallace/melblue2.gif