ieatcrayonz Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 article US rules all porn is child porn By Lucy Sherriff Published Friday 24th June 2005 12:47 GMT All pornography in the US is now effectively classified as child pornography, unless providers can prove the ages of everyone taking part. The law, which requires porn producers to hold copies of all actors' photo ID for seven years, has been in place for some time, but as of 23 June, the rule was extended to cover online pornography as well. This includes online forums, adult personals sites and any other place where adult material may be published. In response, a number of sites have voluntarily taken themselves offline, to avoid breaking the newly applied rules. According to BoingBoing, Rotten.com has taken down ratemyboner.com and gapingmaw.com, which contained the occasional explicit image, although it is/was not a porn site, as such. In a statement on the site, gapingmaw.com's administrators call the law a "side-handed attack on the pornography industry", and says that it would be impossible for it to meet the requirements of the regulations. While the law is designed to protect minors, and prevent exploitation, some free speech campaigners argue that the law gives authorities an awful lot of power to close down site they don't approve of, even if that was not its original goal. They point out that the Patriot Act was used to prosecute people for offenses that were not terrorist offenses shortly after it became law. The Free Speech Coalition is already preparing a legal challenge to the law, and says it has already won some concessions from the government. Meanwhile, others still warn that the law could even leave some performers, such as women operating webcam shows from their homes, open to stalking and harassment, because the law requires that they publish their physical addresses online. See more on that here. You can plough through the text of the legislation here. ® Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Frog Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Would this have anything to do with any of them 'Christian' politicians? Freedom, my ass. The government, which is promoting their Demo(n)cracy worldwide, is busy constricting the personal freedoms out of us, a little at a time. God help us if Patriot Act 2 ever gets passed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Motherment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Welcome to the United Soviet Socialist States of America, leave your freedoms and civil rights at the door, and prepare to do everything you're asked with no questions asked!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Welcome to the United Soviet Socialist States of America, leave your freedoms and civil rights at the door, and prepare to do everything you're asked with no questions asked!!!! 367832[/snapback] We can replace the 50 stars on the flag with a white hammer and sickle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 I must admit, many of the politicians and their advisors are geniuses. If you expect any support on this issue from pols, you will have a long wait; like forever. If an elected official was to take up your cause, his or her opponent could label him "pro-child porn." If an elected official wants bar owners to allow their customers to smoke, their opponent can label them as "wanting to expose pregnant women to smoke," as if they MUST patronize bars in this condition. If an elected official does NOT want Howard Stern fined and or jailed for "indecency," their opponent can label them as "pro-indeceny." In Suffolk County, NY, the County Executive Steve Levy recently led a drive, at community request, to arrest a homeowner. She was renting out to 64 illegal aliens at $225.00 per week, this in a quiet residential community. He is being called a "racist." Imo, I have been placing too much blame on elected officials. We the citizens have sat back and allowed hypocrisy to flourish, many even welcome much of it. I think that things will get far worse. Now, leftist judges are giving away homes, to businesses of all things. Do you see even a little irony there? Soon, you guys will be standing in the parking lot of RWS not allowed to smoke, eat nor drink. You will be looking at each other with blank stares, but without me. I will stay at home, and watch as many games as I can before the Bills, and then the NFL go under. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Live&DieBillsFootball Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Why is it that the conservative and religious nut jobs will not tolerate any restrictions on gun rights but have basically shred the the rights to free speech and privacy? They give it a name like the "Patriot Act" and look upon any dissent as treason. They want special powers to combat terrorism and use the same powers to go after law-abiding citizens who are exercising their rights to free speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Why is it that the conservative and religious nut jobs will not tolerate any restrictions on gun rights but have basically shred the the rights to free speech and privacy? They give it a name like the "Patriot Act" and look upon any dissent as treason. They want special powers to combat terrorism and use the same powers to go after law-abiding citizens who are exercising their rights to free speech. 367847[/snapback] Why is it that the hypocritical leftist wackos will not tolerate even the slightest delay on getting a late term abortion, but will trample on the rights of private property owners, restrict free speech on campus, and seize your home and give it to the nearest corporation? If you think that hypocrisy is confined to those on the right, I am sorry Sir but you are dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Live&DieBillsFootball Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Why is it that the hypocritical leftist wackos will not tolerate even the slightest delay on getting a late term abortion, but will trample on the rights of private property owners, restrict free speech on campus, and seize your home and give it to the nearest corporation? If you think that hypocrisy is confined to those on the right, I am sorry Sir but you are dumb. 367851[/snapback] Did I say anything about hypocrisy being confined to the right? No. But, since when are leftist wackos to blame for restricting free speech or home seizures? You might want to make sure that you take your meds before you start posting in the morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Why is it that the conservative and religious nut jobs will not tolerate any restrictions on gun rights but have basically shred the the rights to free speech and privacy? They give it a name like the "Patriot Act" and look upon any dissent as treason. They want special powers to combat terrorism and use the same powers to go after law-abiding citizens who are exercising their rights to free speech. 367847[/snapback] The Patriot Act passed the House by a margin of 357-66. In the Senate, only Russ Feingold objected, despite calls from Tom Daschle to pass the legislation unanimously without debate. But let's pretend it's only the Republicans who're screwing us over, like the uniformed partisan twits so many of you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Did I say anything about hypocrisy being confined to the right? No. But, since when are leftist wackos to blame for restricting free speech or home seizures? You might want to make sure that you take your meds before you start posting in the morning. 367855[/snapback] Notice the dissenting judges. Would you call them leftists? Home Seizures Perhaps this will answer your question. At least we agree that hypocrisy abounds from both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Did I say anything about hypocrisy being confined to the right? No. But, since when are leftist wackos to blame for restricting free speech or home seizures? You might want to make sure that you take your meds before you start posting in the morning. 367855[/snapback] Legislation signed by President Clinton: * Violated the First Amendment by supporting censorship of the Internet and by demanding a ban on all commercial advertising by cigarette companies. * Violated the Second Amendment by signing the Brady Bill and by arbitrarily banning so-called "assault weapons." * Violated the Fourth Amendment by restricting the right of Americans to employ encryption technology to prevent government spying on electronic communications and by supporting legislation that will mandate national ID cards with biometric identifiers, such as fingerprints. * Violated the Fifth Amendment by supporting and expanding the power of the federal government to seize private property without compensation under asset forfeiture laws and by signing "anti-terrorism" legislation that sharply curtailed the right of habeas corpus. * Violated the Ninth and Tenth Amendments -- which reserve all power not specifically delegated to the federal government to the states and to the people -- by attempting to put America's health care industry under federal control and by numerous other executive actions and decrees. But it's fun to pretend the two parties are somehow different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kegtapr Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 The Patriot Act passed the House by a margin of 357-66. In the Senate, only Russ Feingold objected, despite calls from Tom Daschle to pass the legislation unanimously without debate. But let's pretend it's only the Republicans who're screwing us over, like the uniformed partisan twits so many of you are. 367856[/snapback] But, but, if they didn't vote yes they would have been called unpatriotic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Why is it that the conservative and religious nut jobs will not tolerate any restrictions on gun rights but have basically shred the the rights to free speech and privacy? They give it a name like the "Patriot Act" and look upon any dissent as treason. They want special powers to combat terrorism and use the same powers to go after law-abiding citizens who are exercising their rights to free speech. 367847[/snapback] What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Legislation signed by President Clinton: * Violated the First Amendment by supporting censorship of the Internet and by demanding a ban on all commercial advertising by cigarette companies. * Violated the Second Amendment by signing the Brady Bill and by arbitrarily banning so-called "assault weapons." * Violated the Fourth Amendment by restricting the right of Americans to employ encryption technology to prevent government spying on electronic communications and by supporting legislation that will mandate national ID cards with biometric identifiers, such as fingerprints. * Violated the Fifth Amendment by supporting and expanding the power of the federal government to seize private property without compensation under asset forfeiture laws and by signing "anti-terrorism" legislation that sharply curtailed the right of habeas corpus. * Violated the Ninth and Tenth Amendments -- which reserve all power not specifically delegated to the federal government to the states and to the people -- by attempting to put America's health care industry under federal control and by numerous other executive actions and decrees. But it's fun to pretend the two parties are somehow different. 367859[/snapback] You left out the 28th Amendment - which states if an elected official is to receive services from an intern, said intern must be able to swallow properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tux of Borg Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 I worked as a sysadmin at a webhosting company for 2 years. We hosted 200,000 website, some of which were adult websites. In two years time we had one instance of child prostitution and one instance of child porn. The child prostitution site received a lot of hits and was closed down immediately. The child porn picture in question was taken at a religious nudist colony. There was a nude minister with a bible in one hand and two young kids next to him. (this was before the whole catholic priest scandal) Our legal department had to make some calls, but we found out that it was ok by NC State laws. As some of you know, my brother worked in the abuse department of an ISP. He said that newsgroups were the main distribution of child pornography. It was such a problem, his ISP limited the newsgroup service that they use to provide for free. Now customers have to pay a 3rd party if hey want newsgroups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Live&DieBillsFootball Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 Legislation signed by President Clinton: * Violated the First Amendment by supporting censorship of the Internet and by demanding a ban on all commercial advertising by cigarette companies. * Violated the Second Amendment by signing the Brady Bill and by arbitrarily banning so-called "assault weapons." * Violated the Fourth Amendment by restricting the right of Americans to employ encryption technology to prevent government spying on electronic communications and by supporting legislation that will mandate national ID cards with biometric identifiers, such as fingerprints. * Violated the Fifth Amendment by supporting and expanding the power of the federal government to seize private property without compensation under asset forfeiture laws and by signing "anti-terrorism" legislation that sharply curtailed the right of habeas corpus. * Violated the Ninth and Tenth Amendments -- which reserve all power not specifically delegated to the federal government to the states and to the people -- by attempting to put America's health care industry under federal control and by numerous other executive actions and decrees. But it's fun to pretend the two parties are somehow different. 367859[/snapback] I am not absolving the Democrats of anything. But to me, Republicans have had a free reign in stripping our freedoms in the last few years such as the so-called Patriot Act, the Schiavo mess, etc. The Bill of Rights seemed to work pretty good for the first 200 years or so. I wish EVERYONE would just leave it the !@#$ alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 I am not absolving the Democrats of anything. But to me, Republicans have had a free reign in stripping our freedoms in the last few years such as the so-called Patriot Act, the Schiavo mess, etc. The Bill of Rights seemed to work pretty good for the first 200 years or so. I wish EVERYONE would just leave it the !@#$ alone. 367970[/snapback] What do you actually know about the patriot act? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 What do you actually know about the patriot act? 367972[/snapback] Don't confuse him. It's not on his DNC talking points memo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 26, 2005 Share Posted June 26, 2005 I am not absolving the Democrats of anything. But to me, Republicans have had a free reign in stripping our freedoms in the last few years such as the so-called Patriot Act, the Schiavo mess, etc. The Bill of Rights seemed to work pretty good for the first 200 years or so. I wish EVERYONE would just leave it the !@#$ alone. 367970[/snapback] Again, the Patriot Act was BIPARTISAN legislation. The Patriot Act II that stripped away some of the things that made the Patriot Act so unpalatable was also sponsored and passed in a BIPARTISAN manner. The Schiavo mess? That's your other example? Please. There's no "right" more important than the 2nd Amendment, which the Democrats have been trying to abolish for decades. Try having any of the others without the right to arm yourself or defend your property. Without the ability to own individual weapons, we'd still be reporting to the Crown. All other rights esentially derive from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts