A hundred bucks says Bill O'Reilly delivers a sermon on his show within 48 hours.

including mine.

So Joan cares about free speech?

Isn't there a big free speech case going on right now about [censored]?

I know that [censored] isn't a popular subject at Salon these days. I have a feeling that the whole topic of [censored] is being [censored] these days. Probably because they're worried that the Democrats will need a good scapegoat when they get back in power, and the [censored] [censored] are always available for scapegoating.

But Joan -- do YOU believe that people have a First Amendment right to talk about [censored] in public?

I guess she doesn't -- because if she did, then they would have covered the case.

So really Joan supports provisional free speech -- as long as you don't talk about [censored].

I'll bet she's even happy that I'm using the word [censored] instead of the real word [censored].

See, now nobody has to worry about someone talking about [censored] in Salon.

If there is an organization which works harder than the ACLU to defeat common-sense legislation, I don't know of it.

In the world of computer software, it's easier to have a server based solution, rather than rely on each connecting client to have the proper patches and software.

The same applies to this legislation. To require the service providers to authenticate users as adult is much more reasonable than to expect every computer a child uses to have internet filtering software installed. Is it easier to guard one entrance or ten entrances?

The liberal-thinking people who support the ACLU generally worry about the poor? What about the family that doesn't have $50 more to pay for filtering software?

The ACLU is the most child-hating mainstream organization. Period.

I am very suspicious of whoever is claiming to be saving the children.

Wes,

If you support the ACLU, then you also implicitly support their clients. Like the pedophile group NAMBLA. So it's not surprising that you'd be suspicious of anyone desiring to HELP rather than HARM children.

Get off your fat ass and adopt a needy child or something.

Wes --- Wow! You're right! Oh wait... You didn't actually say anything of substance. Nevermind.

Free speech does not include yelling fire in a crowded theatre or yelling on a airplane. We have society norms that protect society and our children. We have age limits on alcohol consumption. Protecting our children from porn is the society norm. It is not legal for children to purchase porn in magazine form, we protect them. Why should they get it over the internet?

The judge arbitrarily chose to accept the billion dollar industry position of no restrictions in free speech. I question what role that may have played in the decision. Since their was no billion dollar industry defending the Act.

Porn is degrading to women and treats them as objects not as a person. How many women have publicly regreted their participation in porn years later? How has it embarrassed them or limited their career?

Jim J

We should have government mandated blocks on NRA internet sites and other gun topic sites. For the children.

That [censored] shit is alienating, man. You have made your point. Now get off that hobby horse.

Wes, darnit, that's "for the chillllllllll-drun," don't you know?

I would also suggest Operation Rescue--those aborted fetus pics are gross and scary, you know?

Eric Salyer said; "The liberal-thinking people who support the ACLU generally worry about the poor? What about the family that doesn't have $50 more to pay for filtering software?"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They can’t afford $50 but they can afford a PC and internet connection? But no-matter here is a Google search for FREE filtering software:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=free+internet+filtering+&btnG=Google+Search

The only effective filter is a pair of wire cutters. Cutting the power cord to the pc.

Filters are effective as a window screen keeping out the rain.

Jim

Palmyra, you are correct about the filtering software. Google solves most problems. BUT the expense of the software wasn't actually my main point, though.

The point is that that free filter software has to be installed at the 300 computers at the school, the 20 computers at the public library, plus Uncle Harry's PC, Cousin Bob's laptop, etc, etc. It's less efficient and effective to rely on client-installed software rather than a single-point-of-control like the sites themselves.

Why put the burden on the consumer rather than the porn websites? Why are you siding with the porn industry in this case?

Are you for smaller government and personal responsibility or not? Or are you for it on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays and want big brother to step in on Tuesdays and Thursdays?

These conservatives are hard to figger.

Maybe Salon & every other political site that might possibly question anything a republican might say or do should be censored by Karl Rove--you know, for the children.

...all their speeches about states rights. They are big states righters until a state does something they don't like. Then they scream for the feds.

Sigh... I never said anything about my political persuasion. I spoke only in practical terms.

You guys assume that anyone who disagrees with the views of this website or the ACLU must be some crazed right-winger. In fact, neither side of the political spectrum is 100% homogeneous. All people can't be classified as right or left. It's not that simple.

I have quite a few liberal views. I just don't think this court decision was correct. I'm not against all government regulation. It is funny, though, how left-leaning folks are generally in favor of big government until it "infringes" on the rights of pedophiles, the porn industry, or Christian bashers. The flip-flop label you applied to me goes both ways.

I guess I better not tell Eric that I'm a card carrying member of NAMBLA.....He'll hit the roof.

Wes,

That's my point exactly. People who joke about child rape obviously don't value children. Would you joke about an adult woman being raped? I would think not. But comedians and web posters love to joke about the Catholic sex scandal, NAMBLA, etc. Har, har. It's a great laugh. Until you stop an think that some kid's life was totally screwed up so you could get your chuckles. The porn industry, NAMBLA and other fringe sexual movements (no, I'm not including gays, damn it) destroy lives. Just ask all the run-away girls who get roped into the porn industry.

How many stories like Jessica Lunsford do we have to endure before change takes place? It just happened again in Georgia to a 7 year old boy. Raped, strangled, tossed out in a garbage bag.

Society needs to respect and protect children. IMHO, this law was one step in that direction.