...good thing I don't have a job, or I'd be in trouble. Then again, what do you expect clicking on Cumonherface.com?

Anyway, this is actually pretty interesting, especially considering that it comes as a surprise to most people that the continued existence of porn relies on government and prosecutors turning a blind eye rather than its being legally protected. In fact, throughout most of the US, porn is subject not only to the obscenity charge (with its completely worthless Miller Test), but is also illegal because it technically constitutes prostitution. The reason most of it is made in California is precisely because it's one of the only states that provides a legal distinction between porn and prostitution and protection for the former.

Of course, to reasonable people like me and anyone who is not in hopeless religiously-induced denial, the fact that the only difference between porn and prostitution is a camera shows that we might as well legalize the latter, because I firmly believe that modern society would collapse if we got rid of the former.

P.S. Isn't an orgy site a pretty risky venture? I always wondered how those sites like PartyHardcore make enough money to have relatively high production and to pay like 20 models as opposed to just 2 or 3.

Surf's Down, But Boobs Buoyed

;)

I think porn does not legally count as prostitution because it's protected by the first amendment. While true there is money and sex involved, usually both parties are compensated, and there is no soliciting involved--in other words no one is trolling the streets looking for a porn actress.

Actually, there are plenty of porn sites who do just that. Granted, the bigger ones like Bangbus are staged and get girls through 'modeling' ads and such, at least some are real, trolling nightclubs and beaches and offering girls money. I'd like to think that most turn it down, but obviously some don't. And I don't think I even need to mention Girls Gone Wild. Furthermore, in this Internet age, prostitution doesn't necessarily involve trolling the streets either.

Regardless, my point was that while people might think there's an obvious difference, the legal distinction doesn't actually exist in most states. The legality of porn overall is a huge gray area that is rarely addressed because, aside from porn producers, neither politicians nor average citizens would ever be willing to take a public pro-porn stance, despite the fact that the majority of Americans consume it in private.

I swear most of your ideas for content come from them, but you never attribute.

It doesn't prove group sex isn't so unusual. It just proves wanting to jack off to group sex isn't so unusual.

I was totally not the one who typed "apple pie" and if I did it would really be about apple pie not whatever you perverts think I was looking for.

You mention that "apple pie" might not be a suitable search comparison for "orgy", but you don't go anywhere with that. Why not?

Is "orgy" as american as "baseball"? Not by a long shot. We could include other vices. How about gambling? Compare "orgy" with "casino". Again, "orgy" is a big loser. Heck, compare "orgy" with "porn". Not even close. So what is a good point of comparison? Compare "orgy" with "swinger". The results are almost identical.

There you have it... Orgies are as American as swinging.

Includes such things as oysters, hydroponics, hay vs straw, solar water heaters, a bible verse, British law as it relates to firearms, etc.

All this proves is that information can be had easily. With the Internet, I can get access to information that I have only marginal interest in.

I have no large or compelling interest in much of what I search for. If I had to go to the library to look it up, I wouldn’t go through the bother. But because information retrieval is so trivial with the Internet, I can indulge in whatever fancy strikes me.

Seeing lots of hits for any of the above doesn’t mean my community approves or even knows of these things. It just proves they are easy to research.

I actually kind of like this idea. It potentially provides an objective test for Miller. How many searches in a given area are for pornographic material?

The prosecution argues that the community ‘hates’ porn and the defense counters with direct evidence that X% of all web searches conducted by that community relate to pornographic material. It demonstrates that elements of the community are open to porn and adult material.

I don’t know how effective it will prove to be but it is a novel approach.

There is a reason so much of the web is devoted to adult content.

I Googled orgy for Cleveland and all I got was the "Yankees had an Orgy of Hits against the Indians."

Greetings

It is not so much that the authorities turn a "blind eye" to porno but that the test that defines it is utterly murky and prone to all matter of oddity.

{from wiki} The Miller test was developed in the 1973 case Miller v. California. It has three parts:

1) Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,

2) Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions specifically defined by applicable state law,

3) Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. (This is also known as the (S)LAPS test- [Serious] Literary, Artistic, Political, Scientific).

The work is considered obscene only if all three conditions are satisfied.

SLAP means that most written works, no matter how prurient tend to avoid legal attack defined as protected erotica ie Playboy.

Images on the other hand have a tougher time making the SLAP boundary and of course the political environment is the driver of possible legal actions ALWAYS so the current DC faith based hypocrisy is all about criminalizing sex!

I heard of Utah charges against a sex boutique that were dismissed based on Playboy and Penthouse subscriptions in the county so it could play...

Enjoy the journey

WarLord