Xref: utzoo news.admin:3643 misc.legal:5984
Path: utzoo!mnetor!cxsea!ssc-vax!uw-beaver!cornell!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!hubcap!grimlok
From: grimlok@hubcap.UUCP (Grimlok)
Newsgroups: alt.sex,news.admin,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Is alt.sex about to be legislated away?
Message-ID: <3161@hubcap.UUCP>
Date: 6 Oct 88 18:33:36 GMT
References: <7507@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US>
Organization: Clemson University, Clemson, SC
Lines: 41

From article <7507@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US>, by jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US (The Beach Bum):
> In article <9644@cup.portal.com> Ringworld-Engineer@cup.portal.com writes:
>>
>>>SENATE PASSES ANTI-PORN BILL THAT COULD TARGET COMPUTERS
> 
> First to dismiss the "First Amendment" nonsense.  It is nonsense.  Pornography
> is not protected under the First Amendment.  Your complaining about the bill
> is covered.  So you may continue to complain. ;-)

First off, I really hate it when the Legislative bracnh of government
takes advantage 1) of the President's inability to use a line-item veto
(not that Reagan would have vetoed this item) and 2) their ability to
graft totally irrelevent amendments onto a 'certain-to-be-passed' bill.

(What I am talking about here is the graphic depiction of sexual matters
between consenting adults -- NO CHILDREN ALLOWED)

Now, my understanding of pornography in the United States is that it
technically doesn't exist. Granted, certain films, books, magazines,
what-have-you have been found to be obscene, that is, serving to incite
only the prurient interests without any social, political, artistic, or
educational benefits. But these are few and far between and are hardly
enough to compose any threat to society.

People who insist on saying that pornography is not covered by the First
Amendment fail to understand this point. The line between erotic films
and obscene films (films here means videos, films, magazines...) is
sometimes a fine one. Each of us does have the right to view whatever we
please as long as our 'community' has not through due process of the law
found it to be obscene. That last part is important. Due process of the
law...for each and every item that falls under the heading of
pornography/erotica...individually.

One more thing, who is anyone else to tell what I can and can't do
within my own home--as long as what I do isn't hurting _anyone_. I'm not
out there trying to force people to watch the Playboy Channel, why is
there a horde of people tryingto force me to not watch it? I always felt
that my rights stopped at the end of my nose...

Why didn't our founding fathers have the foresight to include the right
to privacy/be left alone in the Bil of Rights? Sigh...