JamesL100 Posted October 14, 2023 Report Share Posted October 14, 2023 In court cases I tend to defer to those involved. A judge/jury heard all the evidence, not just any summary (however long, like this). One party loses. I didn't feel there was a miscarriage of justice in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kckinkybtm Posted February 23 Report Share Posted February 23 I just happened to see this linked to in a news site and had to read it. Apparently, not all Republicans (Conservatives...the never Trump group) have concerns about age restricting the internet. (From the article) Were there a way for Congress to superintend children’s use of the internet without destroying that internet in the process, I would be entirely open to considering it. But I don’t think that there is — and, frankly, I’m not willing to take the risk in order to find out whether I’m right. Thomas Sowell famously observed that “there are no solutions, there are only trade-offs,” and so it is here. The downside of an open and free internet is that some information will be made accessible to people for whom it is not suitable. The downside of government intervention is the guarantee of a fractured internet and the possibility of a sprawling and censorious bureaucracy that acts far beyond its statutory role. [think before following links] https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2024/04/against-age-restricting-the-internet/? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foryouruse Posted February 23 Report Share Posted February 23 I’ll let swing my three points of heresy: 1) Every time I hear people talk about how generations are different than each other, I remind them that the old white guys we complain about were the first generation to repel against their parents. They went to Woodstock and fought against the war in Vietnam. As for Donald, if he is as healthy as he claimed, why didn’t he serve in Vietnam. As for Thomas, we can blame Biden for his treatment of Anita Hill and Thomas’s favors from wealthy donors for his final degree of success. 2) Many of the people making laws in states are trying to ensure they can’t be voted on in the state, because they can’t be passed when the population is against it. I stress that porn drove adoption of the internet. My bosses had me sit down and review Sex and Stock-Quotes, and while we may think there is a gay backlash, I think Straight Men 18-34 outnumber their gay counterparts and will storm the capital themselves. 3) Several of us have discussed the disenchantment with apps. I know of 1 guy with 10 profiles on NKP and several others who use A4A and NKP for scamming, blackmailing, theft and they use fake IDs and multiple Google numbers. People want face pics and Verification that people are real. I’m tired of telling websites when people steal, blackmail or make threats. Some major company needs to be the clearing house and Europe is more likely to get it right first, but Elon Musk is going to have a bigger problem than some other sites because “X” is rife with porn and he’s dug a hole as he’s made the site a pre-screen for OnlyFans.The industry should have cleaned this up before so it couldn’t get to this level of debate.I don’t want BZ to change, but we should have the same safeguards that are making all the other sites such a problem. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brnbk Posted February 24 Report Share Posted February 24 (edited) The United States had this debate a while ago, during its formation as an economic super powerhouse: In the 1950s to 70s; and decided that it was going to allow for sexual freedoms — Playboy and the billion dollar pornographic industry are proof of it. The US invented mass and commercial pornography; and it is part and parcel of US culture, media, and ethos. The 1973 judgments: Miller vs California and the lesser known Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slato, transformed the legal status of sexuality and made it more acceptable to be sexual, atleast for hetrosexuals. Thus, the 'sex industry' ie porongraphic industry has been part and parcel of US society and culture, pretty much like evangelical Christianity. Taking that away would suddenly leave a big cultural void in the US, that simply cannot be filled. It is almost trying to be someone else/another country etc. The sex industry i.e. pornography is just like any other industry, and goes through its lean and high phases. The golden age of pornography is thought to be between the mid 60s to 80s when porn was considered chic. The invention of the Internet saw the rise of another wave of pornography, with a different feel. The market perhaps, is saturated at the moment and is taking a breather. All those noisy politicians who speak against sexuality and porn, like Speaker Johnson usually have to have a psychotherapist or a psychopathic relationship with their priest or someone else - in his case his son - to keep them from porn. Human beings are human beings and eventually the truth of our existence catches up. Human beings are sexual beings and the sex/porn industry serves that need. It is the shame regarding sexuality has to GO, not the porn industry. Edited February 24 by brnbk 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hntnhole Posted February 25 Report Share Posted February 25 21 hours ago, brnbk said: Thus, the 'sex industry' ie porongraphic industry has been part and parcel of US society and culture, pretty much like evangelical Christianity. How very prescient of you to point that out. Religious "pornography" seems a lovely description of that particular bent. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellentonboy Posted February 28 Report Share Posted February 28 If they (meaning elected officials/law enforcement) feel that age restrictions for certain web sites are required shouldn't that be left up to the parents? I find it almost laughable that those in positions of authority are going to be able to "police" not just the entire internet but any other type of device. To me the only two things that will never go out of business are alcohol and sex. They're going to be around, and people are going to find a way to circumvent the "rules". Even on this site, yes many of us have to use a VPN because of laws in our states, and personally I think that is outrageous. But will it eliminate the ability to obtain porn or access certain websites? I don't think so. They could probably pass legislation that would make it illegal for a company like T.I.M. to send us gigs of porn through the USPS, but what about Fed Ex, UPS, etc? Are they going to have EVERY piece of mail examined. I just don't think it's feasible. Now will they try and shut down these production companies, I am sure that is next. But that's like trying to shut down one weed distributor, only to have five more pop up in it's place. I know this is an incredibly complex issue and I doubt many straight people are aware till they try and access "Porn Hub" in their state, only to find some blank screen. It's like a virus no one is quite aware of yet, it's coming, we just don't know where or when it will strike exactly. It will be interesting to see if other countries will even cooperate. Will movies be shot in Mexico or Spain (a real hot bed of gay porn, FYI), Brazil or maybe parts of Asia. I just don't see how they are going to control adult content. Where there is a will, there is a way.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hntnhole Posted February 28 Report Share Posted February 28 Spain? A hotbed of gay porn? How tantalizing .... <filthy grin> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BergenGuy Posted February 28 Report Share Posted February 28 2 hours ago, ellentonboy said: They could probably pass legislation that would make it illegal for a company like T.I.M. to send us gigs of porn through the USPS, but what about Fed Ex, UPS, etc? Are they going to have EVERY piece of mail examined. I just don't think it's feasible. A law could be passed that makes the interstate distribution of porn illegal. That would apply to USPS and the private carriers. And, they wouldn't have to examine every piece of mail. Just do a sting operation and order from distributors. Then, come down hard on the distributors. But, that would only work with US-based distributors. If they were foreign-based, they'd be beyond the reach of American laws and your point that there's no way that every piece of (international) mail could be examined would be true. But, the heteros will be pissed when they discover that they can't get their porn, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BootmanLA Posted March 1 Report Share Posted March 1 On 2/28/2024 at 2:55 PM, BergenGuy said: A law could be passed that makes the interstate distribution of porn illegal. That would apply to USPS and the private carriers. And, they wouldn't have to examine every piece of mail. Just do a sting operation and order from distributors. Then, come down hard on the distributors. But, that would only work with US-based distributors. If they were foreign-based, they'd be beyond the reach of American laws and your point that there's no way that every piece of (international) mail could be examined would be true. But, the heteros will be pissed when they discover that they can't get their porn, either. That would absolutely run afoul of the First Amendment, just like virtually all the other "bans" that have been proposed. Of course, the Supreme Court could overturn its jurisprudence on that, but even these right-wingers don't seem inclined to mess with the First Amendment. But as things stand now, discrimination on the basis of the content of the expression (including porn, but not stuff that is legally "obscene") is subject to the highest scrutiny, and absent a compelling state interest that cannot be achieved in a less intrusive manner, such discrimination is (ordinarily) unconstitutional on its face. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BergenGuy Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 15 hours ago, BootmanLA said: But as things stand now, discrimination on the basis of the content of the expression (including porn, but not stuff that is legally "obscene") is subject to the highest scrutiny, You're right. The risk is right-wingers shifting the definition of "obscene" to the point that it would include pornography or gay porn (they'll probably figure out a way to keep straight porn legal, for a while). The definition of "obscene" is subjective. "Obscene" materials may not be sent through the US Mail, per the Comstock Acts. Since the Comstock Acts are being used by the right-wing to try to outlaw the mailing of "abortifacients", the same people are trying to argue that it applies to private companies such as UPS and FedEx, too, which would basically cut down any physical distribution channels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nude Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 54 minutes ago, BergenGuy said: You're right. The risk is right-wingers shifting the definition of "obscene" to the point that it would include pornography or gay porn (they'll probably figure out a way to keep straight porn legal, for a while). The definition of "obscene" is subjective. "Obscene" materials may not be sent through the US Mail, per the Comstock Acts. Since the Comstock Acts are being used by the right-wing to try to outlaw the mailing of "abortifacients", the same people are trying to argue that it applies to private companies such as UPS and FedEx, too, which would basically cut down any physical distribution channels. That's interesting as the Right has no control over the current Govt. Most of the current laws aren't being enforced. Thanks to our amazing president! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hntnhole Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 17 hours ago, BootmanLA said: jurisprudence It may be time for a word-substitution: prudence seems in short supply in the SCOTUS majority these days - how about we coin a new, more appropriate word for this particular majority? The (new) word "jurisprejudice" seems to roll off the tongue nicely .... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nude Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 Ideas outside of the box: Changing a site description to Educational Human Anatomy might work. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SugarCaneDaddy Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 I feel like tame impala right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BootmanLA Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 5 hours ago, BergenGuy said: You're right. The risk is right-wingers shifting the definition of "obscene" to the point that it would include pornography or gay porn (they'll probably figure out a way to keep straight porn legal, for a while). The definition of "obscene" is subjective. "Obscene" materials may not be sent through the US Mail, per the Comstock Acts. Since the Comstock Acts are being used by the right-wing to try to outlaw the mailing of "abortifacients", the same people are trying to argue that it applies to private companies such as UPS and FedEx, too, which would basically cut down any physical distribution channels. "Obscene" may be subjective, in one sense, but there's an actual legal definition from the Supreme Court. Obscene material must "(1) have a dominant theme in the work considered as a whole that appeals to prurient interest, (2) be patently offensive because it goes beyond contemporary community standards, and (3) be utterly without redeeming social value." I can't imagine the Supreme Court wanting to tackle that definition to rewrite it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now