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

To: goodnesswins
Well then, your understanding is incorrect.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

What part of "no law" don't you understand?

12 posted on 10/23/2005 8:06:02 PM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: AntiGuv

See post 11. Beat ya.


14 posted on 10/23/2005 8:06:45 PM PDT by goodnesswins (DEMS....40 yrs and $$$dollars for the War on Poverty, but NOT a $$ or minute for the WAR on Terror!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: AntiGuv
What part of "no law" don't you understand?

"No law" is pretty clear as is "Congress shall", after that your argument is hazy. The Constitution is just as silent on obscenity as it is on abortion.

It's that tricky ole commerce clause that these folks have run afoul of. If California decides that violent pornography is okie dokie then I suggest they produce it and sell it in California.

25 posted on 10/23/2005 8:18:18 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | 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