Posted on 08/28/2003 2:34:00 PM PDT by Houmatt
Here's your straight-forward answer: 10th amendment. This is a state and local issue. And as far as the what the Nine have ruled in the past...they have also handed down some utterly wrong decisions. Dread Scott, anyone?
Guess what? The DOJ can chew gum, investigate, AND prosecute ALL MANNERS of federal violations at the same time -- including vice, pornos "starring" minors, and snuff flicks.
Now run along and behave. There's a new sheriff in town who doesn't mind drawing a line in the sand to prove a point to your ilk.
You write like dialog from a B movie in the 40's.
If you believe that Ashcroft and our government shouldn't be devoting it's time and money to keeping the people of America safe then I must question your ability to discern the point of a government.
Next time an American kid dies you can smile, raise a glass, and toast that there's a new sheriff in town and we're gonna hunt down those porno varmints. You should have come to NYC after 9/11 and given a smiling and laughingly proud speech on the great clampdown on porno and how it's very important to stay the course in these troubled times. You wouldn't have gotten out of New York City alive but at least some other idiotic yahoos around the country would have gotten a kick out of it.
Maybe in the future you could even call the mothers of Americans murdered and reassure them that we're gonna wipe out those porno varmints.
Long after all of us reading this are dead there will still be porno in one form or another and it will be one of the largest world wide industries much as it is today and people like you will still be around complaining about it while everyone else enjoys it. Most of the complainers will be enjoying it too. Funny how that works.
I saw a lady throw a piece of gum wrapper on the floor the other day. Give Ashcroft a call and maybe he can start a full fledged investigation. These ladies must be stopped!!!!
Do you think we should focus only on one and ignore the rest?
It's a question of priorities. There's no reason why the States can't enforce these laws on their own. Our top priorities are to secure the borders and protect the nation from terrorists. Not going after people who smoke weed for medicine and people who make and watch porn.
HELLO -- On what planet have YOU resided at since 9/11?? Somebody must be doing something right -- your delusional @ss hasn't seen any deaths due to "terrorism," has it? Oh, sorry -- Maybe the DOJ and Homeland Security had neglected to check in with Sakic to review the checklist of interceptions, apprehensions, and disruptions of potential incidents while you were busily "contributing" to society by helping film 'Debbie Does Doggy.'
Now , I may live in NJ, but I've been in the City many times since 9/11 and KNOW people are quite content with Guiliani's cleaning up the festering old whoring district (much to your chagrin.) Believe it or not, just a few old fashioned citizens in NYC may even call the men in blue to have couples copulating in the middle of 5th Ave. arrested, or heroin abusers shooting up in front of St. Parick's busted. You of course might find this a waste of police resources....
Need to be congratulated upon your career choice? True, you may find a demand, but don't pretend producing it or watching it is anything remotely noble. And those crossing the line WILL finally be prosecuted {sob, sniffle}.
Now when you fall asleep tonight try and keep those demon like desires out of your head. Whether your demons are desiring other women or other men (assuming that you presently have either of course) does not concern me.
I just think it's funny that you have the same desires as those you despise, assuming that you don't have any medical or psychiatric conditions that would prevent such feelings.
Guess this issue is actually cutting too close to your innards for some odd reason. Wonder what your personal demons consist of. Unless it's possible that you're the only person on the planet that does not have sexual feelings. Wouldn't that both be a shame for you and a blessing for everyone else.
Wrong. A previous poster provided the dictionary definition of a snuff film, which showed that it must be made for the purpose of sexual gratification, and also clearly showed that you did not know the proper meaning of the term. Do we need to post that definition again?
"An example" of morality? Heck, I'm far from an example, but count me as someone who's trying to stick a couple of fingers in the dike which is holding back a tidal wave of over-the-top immorality, vulgarity, and disregard for any modicum of dignity to the human spirit. However my viewpoint threatens both your living AND ethic, you can count in the Founders as well. They are the ones who initially set forth in motion a national morality and ethic that rattles your brain today. If the "prudish" George Washington were a part of this dialogue, whom do think he'd concur with?
"Wonder what your personal demons consist of. Unless it's possible that you're the only person on the planet that does not have sexual feelings."
Wow -- Are you that clueless?? Because one does not subscribed to worshipping at the Altar of Genitalia, doesn't mean we are Victorian and void od "sexual feelings"; It only means we are not craven dogs and thus not prone to needing to watch others wallow in their canine-like uncontrolable urges.
Bottomline? Fine -- do whatever floats your boat, BUT there are legal limitations on porno. If you have need to change morals laws, don't squawk to me about it -- call your local friendly ACLU office if you want to try and subvert existing U.S. law, OR make Amsterdam your venue.
I can't decide if you're thick or just a liar. I've already told you repeatedly that I don't make my living from this stuff. When you lie to prove your point, your point is without any merit.
you can count in the Founders as well. They are the ones who initially set forth in motion a national morality and ethic that rattles your brain today.
And their cheating on their spouses was acceptable to you?
The founders were indeed great at setting up a good base for our country but it's fools like you that like to elevate them into gods instead of understanding and facing up to their being the same men that live today with many of the same personal codes of "ethics".
If the "prudish" George Washington were a part of this dialogue, whom do think he'd concur with?
I don't pretend to know what old George would think although I'm sure he'd condemn other's "immoralities". He was a politician after all. That's what they all do. Until they're caught.
Ever hear of Mary Gibbons? How about Sally Fairfax?
What about that paragon of morality, Jefferson? Did you ever hear of Maria Cosway? Sally Hemmings?
More importantly, who cares what his current social policies would be today. America is for the people, not for one man's opinion or one group's opinion to run the majority. Especially considering the many among them who tell us to behave one way while behaving in another way behind closed doors.
How many of them have to be proven liars before you get a clue? Personally I still don't think you'd get it no matter what you found out. You'd rather hold on to your childish views of "good" and "evil" men instead of facing up to the grays of reality.
Spare me your bullsh*t morality.
You are defending the onscreen depictions of rape and murder for the purpose of sexual gratification, and suggesting I need therapy.
Wait.
This is a troll, isn't it?
If you feel the need to convince yourself snuff films do not exist (just like UFO's; just because you have never seen them doesn't mean they do not exist), you go right ahead.
You have yet to offer evidence that they exist as defined by the dictionary.
as reason to defend actions that are immoral and illegal.
No, as reason to mock your ignorance.
I stand corrected; you obviously need remedial English before therapy.
Wait. This is a troll, isn't it?
Wait. You just make up this stuff because you are bored?
I don't see you offering evidence they don't. Just because you have not seen one does not mean they don't exist.
But I could not help but notice you have not disputed using the "snuff films" argument to justify what is immoral and illegal.
If there is any blowhard around here, it's you.
And a pitifully stupid one, at that.
I don't see you offering evidence they don't.
Sorry, I'm not doing your homework for you---in the forum of reasoned debate, when YOU make a claim the burden is on YOU to provide evidence for it.
But I could not help but notice you have not disputed using the "snuff films" argument to justify what is immoral and illegal.
Which part of "No" didn't you understand?
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.