Posted on 10/22/2005 4:00:46 PM PDT by Jay777
Two recent Oregon Supreme Court cases demonstrate the American Civil Liberties Union's commitment to the pornography industry, claims an internationally respected expert and Justice Department consultant on the subject.
According to Judith Reisman Ph.D., the cases – State of Oregon v. Ciancanelli and City of Nyssa v. Dufloth/Smith – demonstrate that the ACLU will defend the most extreme elements of a business that now, as these cases show, includes "live sex shows."
Late last month, the Oregon Supreme Court struck down a state law banning live sex shows as well as an ordinance that regulated the conduct of nude dancers. In two 5-1 decisions, the court ruled that both laws violated the rights to freedom of speech and expression found in the state's constitution, adopted in 1859. The lone dissenter in both cases, Justice Paul De Muniz, could not concur with the five other justices in viewing "masturbation and sexual intercourse in a 'live public show'" as a form of speech provided for in the Oregon Constitution. In both cases, the Oregon chapter of the ACLU filed an amicus curiae supporting the right of the strip club owners to facilitate sexual contact between consenting adults.
Previously, the ACLU has defended child pornography. In a quietly prosecuted case in 1981, People v. Ferber, the ACLU won a 5-2 decision in the New York Court of Appeals that for a short time "legalized simulated intercourse, real intercourse, lewd conduct ... with children," says Reisman, author of the soon-to-be-released, "Kinsey's Attic: How One Man's Psychopathology Changed the World." Fortunately, says Reisman, the Ferber case was later appealed by the New York attorney general and ultimately reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Oregon cases, like Ferber, just demonstrate how far the ACLU will go in defending pornographers, adds Reisman.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
The ACLU is much more of a threat to America than terrorists ever thought of being.
No joke: I thought that was a given.
No surprise here. Hell, the ACLU considers the Boy Scouts to be a greater threat to society than NAMBLA. That says one helluva lot right there.
Click the Pic J
Right you are.
Well, now we know what the Leftists really mean when they keep squealing that they're doing what they do "for the children."
Seems their only interest in "saving" the children is for their own personal perverse pleasure.
Color me oh-so-shocked that Liberals are seeking to legitimize yet another abomination as a "legitimate alternate lifestyle."
Oh hell no. Why the heck is this group not been eliminated yet?
I always thought that the ACLU was the law firm of the Porn industry. Is that not true? </s>
Say someone hires two hookers to have sex with one another...
Is that prostitution or art?
I like that pic. Did you make it? We finally raised enough money to get stop the ACLU an ad in the Washington Times. Now I have to come up with a good ad layout.
The best compromise to all of this is to simply to take away authority from the state in regulating such things and give it to the cities and counties.
All cities have their own character. The rural parts of counties have their own character, too. If the people of a city want a theocracy, so be it. If they want a place like New Orleans, so be it.
As long as people can come and go as they please, if they are free to "shop" for their "perfect" city, let them. This shouldn't be a national, or even a state issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
