Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/24/2011 11:07:12 PM PST by stevelackner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: stevelackner

America is sliding down the slippery slope we started on when morality laws were abolished.


2 posted on 11/24/2011 11:09:44 PM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner

In the old days, it was clear. Obscenity has never received First Amendment protection. Pornographic matter has always fallen within that orbit and that’s why government can zone X-rated theaters and adult bookstores. There is no constitutional protection to promote, sell or distribute obscene matter.


3 posted on 11/24/2011 11:11:03 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner
This is a very interesting article written from a legal perspective and exposing a legal conundrum - or at least an apparent contradiction.

Although I do not wish to step into the debate regarding “obscenity” what seems to be left out of it, in my opinion, is the following (which I freely admit are generalizations):

The “normal” prostitute on the street is often a victim herself. She is not engaged in this “business” as a positive choice, but rather does so under the control either of a pimp or at least a drug addiction. The manner in which law enforcement and society deal with such problems is a primary issue. In some countries the decriminalization of this “job” at least allows for a dramatic reduction in its hazards. Keeping it illegal and punishing the women (and sometimes men) of course does little to alter the core causes of the act. Naturally there will be a minority who happily and voluntarily sell themselves in this manner, but they are a small percentage of the total.

In pornography there is no doubt that many of the women, at least, are not wholly sound in their psychology. However the danger factors are not present and the line between “acting” and “prostitution” may be clear, but nevertheless a porn star still has more in common with an actress than with a street prostitute. To name a few, this includes “normal” hours, safe working conditions, contractually obligated payments and, if she is “talented” opportunities for advancement.

Naturally, as prefaced, none of this truly addresses the legal issues mentioned in the article - which were valid open questions. However just as the statement “obscenity is hard to define but you know it when you see it” is somehow acceptable. The reality that porn and prostitution are different follows the same train of thought.

Lastly, porn is a very big business in CA. To make it illegal would be a huge economic hit. That's the last thing they need right now.

8 posted on 11/24/2011 11:35:38 PM PST by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Using profanity gives people who don't want information from you an excuse not to listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner

Two women go to a bar to pick up a man for sex. One does it just for the sex and the other does it for money. What’s the difference?


14 posted on 11/25/2011 12:24:38 AM PST by monocle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner
Things like this are why polygamist Mormons tend to leave Utah and go to live in the bordering states, safest place typically being here in Nevada. I don't see them all the time here, but I've surely seen them.

Heck, prostitution is legal in most of Nevada. How can you tell some guy he can't get married to multiple wives where hookers have been legal since before the Civil War?

15 posted on 11/25/2011 12:42:39 AM PST by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner

The idea of a civilized Christian society is to be well separated from living like wild animals.

The goal is and always has been, to build societal structures that encourages people to make and maintain stable families.

Where do you find all the dope addicts and prostitute filth?

In the alleyways and on the edge of town, the dark cracks and fringe of society.

Where the Liberaltarians want to take us.


17 posted on 11/25/2011 1:21:48 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper (For years the Left protested "the occupation of Iraq"- now they want to "Occupy" all across the US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner

Regarding prostitution, one of the oldest civil liberties question is why is it illegal to sell something that is legal to give away? It is ironic that in a supposedly capitalist society, it is the money that makes the act illegal.


27 posted on 11/25/2011 3:21:18 AM PST by muir_redwoods (No wonder this administration favors abortion; everything they have done is an abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner

Are porn actress’s Prostitutes? Of course they are.

But todays porn isn’t yesterdays porn.

Todays porn has just as many amateurs in it as professionals.

Men photographing their wives in a performance and submitting it to various sites with or without pay.Swingers who photograph their parties. Group sex and women who have sex at parties with male strippers.

Are these women prostitutes or just whores?
How long do these relationships last after the gratuitous sex? Who knows?


36 posted on 11/25/2011 5:14:54 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner

The answer is clear; porn should be illegal.


37 posted on 11/25/2011 5:32:40 AM PST by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner

Legal contradiction well think of it like border control it’s how congress operates,it’s all about money.


39 posted on 11/25/2011 6:03:27 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner

The First Amendment was not intended to protect pornography. It was intended to protect political speech. Simply put, the perversion of it came from the ACLU. They hacked at it until the Supreme Court gave them that ruling.


46 posted on 11/25/2011 6:23:06 AM PST by maxwellsmart_agent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner
This touches directly upon the inability to finely regulate life through the use of that blunt instrument called "law". Of course the law is a blunt instrument because human thinking is at best finite. Something more is needed. Let's face it, the essence of legal wrangling over whether something is pornography or political speech is recondite argument about arcane definitions of words and actions. It's all about "legalese".

In contrast one reads in the Bible, "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;" (Hebrews 10:16)

And in another place we read about the fruit the Holy Spirit produces in our lives, "(For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret." (Ephesians 5:9-12)

Today it seems too many of "those things" are done, not in secret, but openly, in public. And those who do are celebrated for it.

Our era could never write the Constitution. Only a moral and religious people could have written it. And a moral and religious people don't need many laws or finely worded statutes carefully parsed by hoards of lawyers.

To the making of many laws there is no end. And in making those many laws there is an end to liberty. It was Christ Himself who told us, " . . . If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free? Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed." (John 8:31-36)

48 posted on 11/25/2011 6:29:48 AM PST by hfr (Liberalism is a moral disorder that leads to mental disorder (actually it's sin))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: stevelackner

Why is it legal to promote a film of two men having sex but against the law to criticize them for doing it.


57 posted on 11/25/2011 10:37:38 AM PST by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson