Amaros
Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005 Status: offline
|
Interesting, because in a series of cases referred to as Ashcroft vs. ACLU, a ban on enforcement of the the COPA legislation that established free rein in prosecuting online pornography was upheld by SCOTUS, on the grounds that it was likely to be found unconstitutional. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._American_Civil_Liberties_Union The more recent legislation that was passed refers exclusively to child pornography, but possibly may be more broadly interpreted by the Bush DOJ in orer to shore up his religious right wing base - still, it's a clear misapplication ind misinterpretationof the actual legislation, and anyone facing these charges will probobly beat them, providing they weren't actually involved in either producing pornographic material using underage models, or soliciting pornographic material to minors - and have neough money to hire the lawyers neccesary to establish same. This is an old legal trick, basically banrupting the accused with the cost of defending themselves of bogus charges - the champions of tort reform themselves using nuisance suits to try nad ruin legitimate businesses - ironic, but typical. quote:
I have noticed with increasing vigour, that non - religious people or those who have a different faith to chrisitanity can openly attack christianity and ridicule it continuously as though its the normal thing to do - but the reality is, is that it makes You(generic) no different to the 'christians' you are ridiculing or pointing fingers at. And it is no different to racism, or being anti-feminist or any other anti anything. I, on the other hand, have noticed that people claiming to be Christians feel to verbally abuse and slander anyone they don't approve of, which includes not only people who engage in sexual practices they disaprove of, but scientists (godless athiests, by extension, immoral), etc. etc. - while somehow feeling that they should be immune from criticism themselves. Soon as you get into politics, it isn't religion anymore baby, it's politics, and nobody is immune to criticism, can't have it both ways. Verbal abuse and slander is considered a political act, and if associated with a specific religion, one cannot expect public criticism of said religion to be withheld out of respect for religion. Even the Bible had something to say about that, something about "doing unto others...". quote:
/tongue in cheek activated At least if Christ appeared now they wouldn't crucify him. Of course there is Gitmo /tongue in cheek deactivated http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/grand.htm
|