It's interesting that interracial sex (noteably sex between black men and white women) are lumped into the category...that's showing you what the real agenda here is.
The moral crusaders certainly won't let them off the hook, and what's more, they have a dream scenario: that the government will prosecute and embarrass the companies profiting from pornography.
Har - fantastic point! I wonder if the DOJ will go after the USPS, which profits from and delivers more porn than any other entity.
Quietly and steadily, George W. Bush is reversing the corruption and damage done by 8 years of debauchery. In every area of morality and decency, he is leading this country back to righteousness........promoting marriage, a culture of life, love of family and neighbor, accountability, responsibility for one's actions, faith and goodness.
To those who have said that a vote for Bush is no different than a vote for Gore, I say....
"How wrong could you have been?" Praise God for this President!
Think Larry Flynt and the endless support coming from the lowest elements of Hollywood.
AT&T is in the business. Yahoo! and AOL profit from it. Westin and Marriott make more money selling it than they do snacks and drinks in their mini-bars. And at a reported $10 billion a year, it boasts the kind of earnings every American business envies.
Politicians' and bureaucrats' paychecks in part come from taxes and fees on the porn industry. And since all people benefit from taxes then all taxpayers benefit from the porn industry. Interesting chain of "logic".
The First Amendment was and is intended to protect minority free speech -- not the majority speech that most everyone already agrees with.
"No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him."
--Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, 1816. ME 15:24
How and why individual rights prevail over the illusion of group rights.
The smallest minority is the minority of one -- the individual. When the individual is protected all larger-than-one minorities as well as the largest majority are protected. The largest majority is the human species.
Whenever possible, absolutes are preferred to relatives. Absolutes are constant across all cultures and times whereas relatives change from culture to culture and generation to generation or century to century.
Absolute: The highest moral, human and individual right is the right to self-defense against the initiation of force, fraud and coercion. The proof is that without one's own life a person has nothing, nada, zero, zip.
Absolute: Every instance that force, fraud or coercion is initiated against a person that person experiences a loss of value to his or her life. Only the victim knows how much his or her life was, is and will be diminished by the person that wielded initiation of force, fraud or coercion against him or her.
When plaintiff decides that arbitration will not meet plaintiff's needs, trial by jury is the best recourse that a plaintiff has for gaining restitution for plaintiff's life being diminished by the initiation of force, fraud or coercion.
The plaintiff must convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt that he or she has been the victim of initiation of force, fraud or coercion by the defendant. Also, plaintiff must express the loss of value plaintiff suffered and express what plaintiff seeks in terms of restitution or compensation for plaintiff's loss of value.
Here's a short, partial list that a plaintiff might bring charges against a person whom the plaintiff claims victimized him or her. All cases can be settled via trial by jury.
Plaintiff claims defendant initiated force, fraud or coercion against plaintiff by:
Defendant killed person that is close relative or close friend to plaintiff. This is a logical choice of who would be first in line to become plaintiff. E.g., spouse, child, sibling, etc.
Defendant assaulted victim
Defendant stole from victim
Defendant blackmailed victim
Defendant ingested drugs
Defendant sold drugs to third party consenting adult
Defendant viewed pornographic material
Defendant sold pornographic material to third party consenting adult
Defendant sold sexual favors to third party consenting adult
Defendant engaged in gambling with third party consenting adult
The burden is on the plaintiff to prove to a jury beyond reasonable doubt that he or she has been the victim of initiation of force, fraud or coercion and to what extent the plaintiff has been damaged by the defendant.
The bottom line is: if the jury agrees with you/plaintiff you're right and win the case. If the jury disagree with you/plaintiff you're wrong and lose the case.
Can I repeat that one more time?
But times have changed. Clinton is out, Bush is in, and porn moguls are nervous.
How about one more time?
I think I'll go rent that Reconstruction era documentary about this. I believe it is called "Mandingo." I wonder if Ken Burns produced it. :-)
I have a feeling that there are going to be a lot of dissappointed male channel-surfers tommorow night at 9:01. ("Dude, check out what's on PBS!....Aw man, nevermind!")
Seriously though, why is sex between a black man and a white woman more serious or offensive? Ideas, anyone?