[kstewskis]

I am all for the first amendment right of free speech, but sometimes you have to draw the line at what is decent and is just plain filth.

I'm thinking that it shouldn't be an issue of "free speech."

No one is telling these pornographers that they can't sell, "express", ect...their filth. Just not to kids. That's why they call it "adult language," "adult behavior."

Just as a liquor store owner can't sell to minors, he can control who he sells to. The porno pirates don't care, they can't regulate just who looks at their trash online. As long as it gets seen.

Sick.

[supercat]

No one is telling these pornographers that they can't sell, "express", ect...their filth. Just not to kids. That's why they call it "adult language," "adult behavior."

The question the Supreme Court is kicking down to lower courts is whether practical means exist by which pornographers can ensure that their works are not sent to children without having to withhold them from adults as well.

From a practical standpoint, I don't really know what can be accomplished legislatively, since offshore companies can still send in whatever they want.