Protecting 1st Amendment Rights

Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

pinkpleasures -> Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/29/2005 3:17:47 PM)
As by now most people are aware, Bush has decided to go after "porn" including BDSM...on the 'net and elsewhere. i suggest that those of us in a position to do so form a Political Action Committee and fight this repressive and unconstitutional effort. It is sexual McCartyism and unless we speak up, the religous right will be hunting us like dogs. Anyone interested please post here or email me; setting up a PAC wouldn't be easy for me and i will not waste my time with it if i am a lone voice; i'll limit myself to letters to the White House. pinkpleasures

onceburned -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/29/2005 3:44:34 PM)
How would that relate to the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom?

thetammyjo -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/29/2005 4:18:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: onceburned How would that relate to the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom? This is exactly what the NCSF has been working toward with their biggest case to this point with Barbara Nike (I believe that is her name). I think the best way the average person can help is two-fold. Support groups that all reaady do this sort of thing (do multiple group help or hender legal work?). Second support the artists, writers, and publishers who continue to make their work available. If you support them, not just with money but with your letters and email, you let them know they are doing something you value and it increases their likelihood to continue their work regardless of legal threat.

pinkpleasures -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/29/2005 7:46:57 PM)
The site posted by onceburned seems to be very good; at this point i would recommend working with them. If later, any dissension occurs, we at CM can always revisit the option of forming our own organization. In any event, it is time to speak up. pinkpleasures

lonewolf05 -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 1:46:47 AM)
so just gimme 'a' link where i start......... woofie

gypsyeyez -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 3:21:59 AM)
Ok... here is my stand point. America land of the Free... Under Bush... Yeah Right. Since Bush came into office we cannot smoke in resturants in most states .... We cannot smoke in bars in some others... Now we are not allowed to talk about our lifestyle with other like minded adults.... This is B-S. So just let me know what I can do I will be glad to help in anyway possible with the PAC

pinkpleasures -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 3:25:18 AM)
Wolfie and gypsyeyez...onburned's post above has the link i spoke of...and there may be other organizations as well. One wonders what the ACLU will do. pinkpleasures

LadyJulieAnn -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 4:23:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gypsyeyez Ok... here is my stand point. America land of the Free... Under Bush... Yeah Right. Since Bush came into office we cannot smoke in resturants in most states .... We cannot smoke in bars in some others... Now we are not allowed to talk about our lifestyle with other like minded adults.... This is B-S. So just let me know what I can do I will be glad to help in anyway possible with the PAC If you do some research, you will find that a lot of anti-smoking legislation was pushed during the Clinton administration. Be well, Julie

Gem -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 5:43:45 AM)
Brightest Blessings Wolfie and gypsyeyez...onburned's post above has the link i spoke of...and there may be other organizations as well. One wonders what the ACLU will do. pinkpleasures >>> The ACLU walked away fromt he Barbra Nitke case, as did Barbra Nitke herself. Not sure how the NCSF is still allowed to use her name. edited for correction: I was given some bad information concerning the above statement I apologize for trusting my source and being lazy and not doing further research. Barbra Nitke is indeed going forward with the case. end edit I think PinkPleasure if you want to start your own action you should, a lot of people have bad history and bad blood with the NCSF and their practises, besides the more voices that are heard the better it can be. Also as a side note, porn and the lifestyle on the internet are targeted because folks do not want to parent their children's use of the internet, and so one to many parent has come across little Johnny's porn sites, or IM's from strangers that are sexually explicit. Just like Tipper Gore's music lyric bans, parents want the goverment to make their decisons and parent for them. As to the non-smoking bans well that was started with the past administration, and the more liberal thinking groups. Blessed Be Gem Save a Horse Ride a Cowboy.. B&R

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 6:33:53 AM)
And in other news ..... Congress is passing through laws that will tax email. We cant let this happen. We all have to get together and tell those folks in Washington "no"! And also there is plans in the works right now to bring back the draft. Don't those politicians know anything? We all have to group together and keep them from doing this. And there is also going to be a constitutional amendment baning gay marriage. Really! Honest there will be. Just you watch, if bush get re-elected there will be a new constitutional amendment just hours after he gets sworn in again And voting rights for blacks are just about to expire. This is it. This is the end. We are doomed. How dare those evil nasty politicians take the right to vote away from African Americans. We all have to ban together to keep this law from passing. And there is a law coming to vote any minute now that will charge long distance charges if you use dial up ISP. Its critical important that you contact yoru congressman right now this very second! If you wait until this afternoon it will be to late. We have to stop this law and stop it now! And there is a law that is going to ban breast feeding. Run for the hills everyone. Its all over now. Our nation as we know it is totally over with. We are doomed. And a new law that has just passed will let credit card companies give your phone number and address to anyone that asks. Now how evil is that? Huh? HUH? For gods sake man we have to do something!!!!! We have to rise up and citizen and get this law overturned. How dare those politicians interfere in our private lives this way! And there is going to be a law letting pesticide companies run experiment on poor minority children!!!! This is real! Honest it is! Wake up people! We have to stop those power hungry politicians! And this upcoming tax season there is going to be a new law passed that requires you to list every gun you own on your tax form. Look it up if you don't believe me. Our rights as Americans are being stripped away! We have tto do something! And there is a law congress is trying to pass that will get rid of all public broadcasting. No more NPR or PBS! Yeah yeah, I know all those other times that wild rumors went flying around that congress is just about to pass a law doing something or other that was actually just misunderstood and misquoted interpretations of laws that were either never being considered in the first place, or were laws on a topic that is just barely related by the most flimsy chain of reasoning. but this time it is REAL! Oh yeah, one last item you should know about. Congress is passing a law that will let the sky fall! We have to act against this and act now!

Dadddy -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 9:03:41 AM)
Reading all of this brings to mind one of my favorite novels in high school, 1984! Big brother is trying to watch us all. Here's something I don't quite understand. For most people who think any sexuality is evil, it's a moral issue, right? Well, aren't morals tied in with most religious faiths? Isn't all of this censorship just a really blatant example of non-separation of church and state?

thetammyjo -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 9:16:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyJulieAnn quote: ORIGINAL: gypsyeyez Ok... here is my stand point. America land of the Free... Under Bush... Yeah Right. Since Bush came into office we cannot smoke in resturants in most states .... We cannot smoke in bars in some others... Now we are not allowed to talk about our lifestyle with other like minded adults.... This is B-S. So just let me know what I can do I will be glad to help in anyway possible with the PAC If you do some research, you will find that a lot of anti-smoking legislation was pushed during the Clinton administration. Be well, Julie I don't smoking bans reflect any particular political agenda but a city by city agenda often citing civil rights, health beliefs, and the desire to save money in health costs. Not saying it is right or wrong, I personally know where I'm happier to eat, but just that it is a complex development. Most things in society are complex. Human being just like thinking its all easy for some reason.

LadyJulieAnn -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 10:06:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo I don't smoking bans reflect any particular political agenda but a city by city agenda often citing civil rights, health beliefs, and the desire to save money in health costs. Not saying it is right or wrong, I personally know where I'm happier to eat, but just that it is a complex development. Most things in society are complex. Human being just like thinking its all easy for some reason. I agree, which is why I find it funny that so many people blame one person for legislation that is passed down. Be well, Julie

Soulhuntre -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 10:09:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pinkpleasures i suggest that those of us in a position to do so form a Political Action Committee and fight this repressive and unconstitutional effort. It is sexual McCartyism and unless we speak up, the religous right will be hunting us like dogs. Interested peopel are far, far better off supporting an organization that already exists. In things like this "size" matters. quote: ORIGINAL: gypsyeyez Since Bush came into office we cannot smoke in resturants in most states .... You cannot honestly believe that the smoking bans are a result of any Bush policy do you? quote: ORIGINAL: gypsyeyez Now we are not allowed to talk about our lifestyle with other like minded adults.... Of course we are. HEll TES in NY still holds 3-4 meetings a week that are well publicized and well atttended. Chat rooms till flourish, organizations still flourish, the clubs are still open. There is only ONE area where our freedoms are currently under attachk... it is an important one to be sure, but it is still only the one. Currently graphic descriptions of S/M actions may be considered "obscene" under a law that has not jet had a Supreme Court challenge. Is it a problem? Sure. Is it somehting to fight? Of course. But lets not pretend that the KGB is kicking in doors and beating us up. It isnt true. quote: ORIGINAL: Dadddy Here's something I don't quite understand. For most people who think any sexuality is evil, it's a moral issue, right? Well, aren't morals tied in with most religious faiths? Isn't all of this censorship just a really blatant example of non-separation of church and state? No, it is not. Elected officials are absolutely allowed to use their moral and ethical judgement when making decisions. That is part of the reason we elect them. To say that they should throw away their personal ethics is silly as woudl it be not only silly but unconstitutional to disqualify from office anyone who was deeply religeous. The speration of church and state has only one intention - that the state will establish no "official" or "national" faith above any other. It was, by the way, intended to protect the ability of religeous faiths to influence policy by making sure o single faith had all the power. It was in no way intended to prevent religeous influence. It certainly does not mean that people cannot make decisions based upon their individual faith.

pinkpleasures -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 1:54:43 PM)
quote: I don't smoking bans reflect any particular political agenda but a city by city agenda often citing civil rights, health beliefs, and the desire to save money in health costs. thetammyjo This is what i think: individuals get all lathered up by smoking because smokers are generally polite and will put out a cigarette or move away if asked...and people feel less and less control/safety/comprehension of their own lives, so these little "Dom" moments are gratifying. Government got involved because it was politically feasible to pass unconstitutional measures allowing the tobacco litigation(s) to go forward, and they wanted the money, which virtually every state misused. pinkpleasures

Guest -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 2:51:12 PM)
If people can try and stick to the op and start another thread on smoking,it would help.Otherwise Mods will have to move this into off topic discussion as it does not centre on BDSM specifically. Thanks for alls help.

pinkpleasures -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 3:13:44 PM)
quote: I think PinkPleasure if you want to start your own action you should, a lot of people have bad history and bad blood with the NCSF and their practises, besides the more voices that are heard the better it can be. Gem If three more people ask, i will look into setting up a PAC; we may not even need such a complex structure. i won't know till i do the research. Obviously it could not be an official CM activity; possibly they might allow us a link. But that's way down the road. pinkpleasures

lonewolf05 -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 3:39:12 PM)
i didnt realize i was going to be FORCED to spend money just-to-join. i wouldn't mind helping in a donation but i had NO desire to belong to some huge association thing or whatever ya call it...organization or such? i merely wanted to chip-in.......not have some outgoing membership.... lemme know how i can do this and not have to be a member thingy....i dont wanna join-up.......just help a bit/ thanks

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 4:00:43 PM)
quote: There is only ONE area where our freedoms are currently under attachk... it is an important one to be sure, but it is still only the one. Currently graphic descriptions of S/M actions may be considered "obscene" under a law that has not jet had a Supreme Court challenge. Your a few decades out of date there. The last time obscenity was challenged under the law was FCC v. Pacifica way back in 1987. (Obscene devices, in contrast to obscene images, was last baned in Alabama in 1999. The battle on that one is still ongoing.) No, the current rally cry is not "obscene" but instead "please wont someone think of the children". Specificity, title 18 U.S.C. § 2257 got amended on June 23, 2005 and now has some rather harebrained record keeping requirements in order to "prove" that all models are over the age of 18. Prosecution, if it even comes at all, is going to be because someone didn't dot all the Is and cross all the Ts for the necessary paperwork, not because of the obscenity of the materials being sold. It also helps to remember that the amount of bureaucratic red tape you gotta fil out to operate a bank is more than the amount of bureaucratic red tape you gotta fill out to run a porn website.

pinkpleasures -> RE: Protecting 1st Amendment Rights (10/30/2005 4:53:13 PM)
lonewolf05; i think if we go our own way, donations would be ok but not paying memberships. People at all levels of the economy should feel welcome, and i dunno what the money would be needed for anyway; we just want to influence the government. pinkpleasures

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625