[jwalsh07]

You also miss the point. Forget the law, the Supremes ruled that virtual child porn was protected by the first amendment thus rendering unconstitutional the laws passed in 24 states addressing this very issue. And pretend conservatives applaud this usurptation of power from a central authority.

Yuck!

[Dinsdale]

the Supremes ruled that virtual child porn was protected by the first amendment

You misunderstand the ruling. They ruled that the law was too vague, they did not make any sweeping ruling.

[amused]

You also miss the point. Forget the law, the Supremes ruled that virtual child porn was protected by the first amendment thus rendering unconstitutional the laws passed in 24 states addressing this very issue. And pretend conservatives applaud this usurptation of power from a central authority. Yuck!

hmmmmm what to do? free speech vs. states rights...I'm sorry I can't agree, free speech will always trump such state rights. Even the most vile of thoughts. I would work in the community to counter such disgusting crap but I will not allow gov't to have such power (granted I am not the all powerful Oz so I'm stuck with rants, protests, letters etc.). The law itself was good intentioned and needs to be re-written more specifically to counter actual child pornographers from saying their depictions are not real.

What is with the constant p#ssing contest on who's the most conservative? Not picking on you, but that seems to be the slam of slams on FR, up there with being called a liberal. [chuckle]