Replies

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]

Personnally I could care less how conservative you are.

I do care that you think pedophiles have an unalienable right to virtual kiddie porn and I also care that you place the "right" of pedophiles to satisfy their perversity above the rights of citizens to govern themselves.

I also care that you seem to embrace a living breathing document when it suits your fancy. The original intent of the first amendment did not protect obscenity.

By the way, is the right to life a federal issue or a state issue?

I suppose I could live with pedophiles having some kind of free speech right to look at this stuff ---but we need to start giving child molestors the death penalty. They've been allowing child molestors to live in neighborhoods where children are ---it should either be forever in prison or execution if they ever lay a hand on a child.