Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: anniegetyourgun
how am I so open-minded that my brains will fall out? I think child porn is evil, and no decent person would look at it or exploit children in that way. But completely digitally manufactured images break no law in their making. Granted, their communication is the deepest of human depravity. But the censorship too dangerous.

wasnt too long ago that the Catholic church decided the Protestant beliefs were "spiritual pornography," and I bet similar statements were made in the reverse. Thus, doctrinal books were banned under force of law.

Problem is that I fear the slippery slope. Once we have the government start deciding what speech is acceptable, and what is not, we've started the inexorable decline towards tyranny. And eventually, the government will decide that the preaching of Biblical Christianity is unacceptable to them. The marketplace of ideas can conquer pornography. But a tyranical government deciding what may be spoken, written and communicated is likely to decide that the Gospel is unacceptable.

62 posted on 04/24/2002 6:29:25 PM PDT by jude24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]


To: jude24
Problem is that I fear the slippery slope

Here's your slippery slope.

In 1973 SCOTUS ruled, in Roe v Wade, that first trimester abortions were a right granted some damn place in the Constitution.

A bit later SCOTUS ruled, in Doe v Bolton, the right to kill babies extended all the way to through the third trimester due to an illusory "health of the mother" issue also located in the same document, somewhere.

Today we kill'em on the way out and some Professor down at Princeton is lobbying to extend that to, oh lets say, two or three years after the birth of the baby.

How's that for slippery from the same slippery clowns who have ruled virtual porn protected in that same heavy breathing document.

65 posted on 04/24/2002 6:39:13 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

To: jude24
I reject the “slippery slope” arguments here. There will always be people who misuse words. That is no reason to back away from your position and accept their definitions. Laws against pornography have always been the expressions of the majority will in localities. What the Supremes have done is denied the right of a community to set its own rules regarding the pollution of its environment. If you approve, you approve of the power of an un-elected elite to reduce your power as a citizen.
116 posted on 04/25/2002 4:31:38 AM PDT by moneyrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson