dear sg,
the sky is not falling. the justice department is not scouring the site looking for naughty pictures with the intent of shutting it down.
as reprehensible you or anybody else finds the bush administration and attorney general gonzalez, they know that there is no chance in hell that a successful obscenity prosecution will come from an all-out assault on our little i-net community.
the government tried not too long ago in the extreme associates case and failed. the smut produced by extreme is some of the most vile, deplorable and graphic porn i've ever heard of. and yet it is till protected by the 1st amendment. applying the standard established by the extreme case and the recent privacy standards in the recent texas sodomy case, the content of suicidegirls is well within the boundaries of protected speech and what can be enjoyed from the privacy of your homes.
and for the record, obscene material is defined by the supreme court as follows:
(1) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
(2) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and
(3) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
best regards,
the big porn defender
the sky is not falling. the justice department is not scouring the site looking for naughty pictures with the intent of shutting it down.
as reprehensible you or anybody else finds the bush administration and attorney general gonzalez, they know that there is no chance in hell that a successful obscenity prosecution will come from an all-out assault on our little i-net community.
the government tried not too long ago in the extreme associates case and failed. the smut produced by extreme is some of the most vile, deplorable and graphic porn i've ever heard of. and yet it is till protected by the 1st amendment. applying the standard established by the extreme case and the recent privacy standards in the recent texas sodomy case, the content of suicidegirls is well within the boundaries of protected speech and what can be enjoyed from the privacy of your homes.
and for the record, obscene material is defined by the supreme court as follows:
(1) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
(2) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and
(3) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
best regards,
the big porn defender
VIEW 3 of 3 COMMENTS
This weekend I actually heard a girl say "I don't drink Rock Star energy drinks anymore because they are owned by a Republican company." not that they are owned by a baby-raping company, or the KKK, but just Republicans.