Secret Squirrel wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Frank McCoy <mccoyf@millcomm.com> wrote in
> news:kcvh42pqf09sgbrcgh6cv7htjg8rapfmao@4ax.com:
>
> > In alt.support.girl-lovers "bobandcarole"
> > <bobandcarole333@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>He said he is sending to Congress a legislative package
> >>that includes greater penalties and improved cooperation
> >>from Internet service providers.
> >>
> >>"This legislation will help ensure that Internet service
> >>providers report the presence of child pornography on their
> >>systems by strengthening criminal penalties for failing to
> >>report it," the attorney general said.
> >
> > Anybody want to bet that it won't be just another flimsy
> > re-write of the CPA (Grossly misnamed the "Child Protection
> > Act") which was yet another rewrite of Comstock's original
> > legislation against anything sexual; including especially
> > information on birth-control, to prevent women from not
> > having kids?
> >
> > The Supreme Court keeps ruling that adults have the right
> > to sexual information and striking down those laws; and
> > Congress keeps right on trying to pass the same old shit
> > ... Always (of course) disguised as "Protecting Children
> > from the HORRORS of Pornography"; when in actuality they're
> > more aimed at preventing ANYBODY from getting sexual
> > information of any kind ... particularly about
> > birth-control.
>
> Notice: such laws are about "indecency". "Indecency" is
> different from "obscenity", in legalese. "Indecent" means
> "legal, but maybe not appropriate for all audiences".
> This is all about banning *legally protected* speech.
>
> > Politicians are well familiar with giving truly obnoxious
> > legislation names that make it seem downright unpatriotic
> > and almost criminal to oppose ... like the so-called
> > "PATRIOT" act, which is prima-facie unconstitutional, and
> > the so-called "Child Protection Act" which would have truly
> > *hurt* far more children than it ever would have protected
> > from the evils of pornography. If nothing else, than by
> > preventing their parents access to birth-control
> > information.
> >
> > I presume this particular re-write will only change a word
> > or two from the earlier attempts to revive Comstock's
> > legacy, present the legislation as "new"; and hope that
> > with our new SCOTUS that this time they'll get it through
> > the courts.
> >
> > Anybody taking my bets?
>
> I just think it's ironic that Alberto Gonzales, the author
> of the US torture policy which resulted in teenaged boys being
> raped at Abu Ghraib, is now thundering from the pulpit about
> child porn. "It is brutal, it is criminal"--not to mention
> "obscene"--describes his torture policy far better than it
> does dirty pictures.
>
> Secret Squirrel
The crackdown is on child pornography
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: N/A
>
> iQEVAwUBRElyAT/rA6+b3AyhAQETxQf/XbdNejNkjbFq19cYVY5AqvevqLTuffRt
> pAL40gIf9z/9YNJ5cEmFSdzugZtmMoJLRnOzASKmMwbMJt0TIhuHKKqti3/MUB/O
> 1p8VhQHrcDo8KoT0rjIjNyrCKT/iwuFiskBgJur6z1JbJULMRWfSFFNqodu+pSBE
> 6R3EweSwnP4TVQzyYU2EI1aUzJ+AmLWe/LbonMIqbh2xCbGFDr/hICyaWVhLuZUK
> haX7iU7HlSMWsIsG9keEawq0QFDmxpL4DXSl1+FdAlHRzsFSudmtwGgANn2VE8iN
> mHWvVrJ0KAYO6GuocTXwdxRpqKWs4yJdQlvnF/Hq8CpJuniunVsiqw==
> =fezL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
> The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
> is unverified.
|
|