Smut test

I'm reading over at Jeff Jarvis' place about the new indecency fines. So I looked up what some really cool guy had to say about this a year or so ago in the comments section of this place. Me. Here it is a little more coherent and possibly easier to read.

--==--

This little bit was in response to something a guy saw that he felt was wrong on TV:

A great majority of Americans are offended?

As I recall a recent porno prosecution in Ashcroft's home state couldn't get a conviction from a jury. Ya gotta wonder why?

There is as much $$$ spent on commercial Hollywood videos as is spent on porn videos. Some body is watching that stuff. Do you suppose any of them will be on the jury?

My answer to the smut on TV problem? Don't watch. Don't go where others watch.

And if thine eye still offends thee? Pluck it out.

--==--

Well Ashcroft was devoting quite a bit of government time in an age of terrorism to an office devoted to researching smut. Evidently some people are so strong that looking at smut 8 hours a day will not harm them. We should clone them. If cloning was legal.

By going after all kinds of smut in every venue Ashcroft may be destroying his own campaign. He is a very clever Attorney General.

Video tapes? Don't you have to buy or rent them? Pay per view? etc. If he just stuck to over the air TV he might have gotten some traction.

Janet Reno got results from a targeted campaign and no opposition. Ashcroft's campaign is not designed for any results other than headlines.

It would be truly pathetic if so many weren't falling for it.

================================================

As for smut being pushed into the home? You must be a liberal who needs the government to show you where the power switch is on your own TV. My condolences.

BTW there is this really neat new invention that might solve your problem. I mentioned it earlier but perhaps you haven't heard of it. It is called the video tape. You buy or rent these things called tapes and you can actually preview what your kids watch before you let them watch it. I hear that the tape machines are not too expensive especially if you already have a TV. I'm also told there is a rating system than can advise on the general nature of the content of a tape. You might want to look into it.

Of course if you can't find out how to turn off your set hooking up a tape machine is probably beyond your competence. I'd call in professional help in that case.

--==--

You got to wonder about Republicans. They get to talk about and effectively promote smut (the Starr Report?) while pretending to fight it. I heard more talk about BJs and semen at work than I ever had before. It was on the tip of every tounge (if you will pardon the expression).

I suppose if you keep the kids from watching the news you might be safe. Maybe.

The Democrats at least prefer don't ask, don't tell. A modicum of discression. The Republicans want smut on the front pages.

Why?

Way cool.

--==--

It seems rather simple to me. If you don't want kids to observe sex keep them out of the barnyard and don't keep pets.

Don't want sex intruding in your home? The Amish have it down. Don't own a TV.

Ladies and gentlemen. If you are incapable of protecting yourselves from a television how do you expect to be trusted with guns?

This is a bunch of whining no better than what I hear from liberals. The objects of the whine are different but the whine is the same: "I need a government program...."

Next time a liberal asks for a government program instead of complaining you ought to do some log rolling.

I got it. You guys work on sex speech and the libs can do hate speech. I'm sure you can work something out.

--==--

Here is my best shot. To pass muster porn will turn Biblical:

You realize that if you get your wish porn will have to turn biblical to pass muster (socially redeeming value).

"Lot's Daughters". "Don't Marry Foreign Donkey Dicks". "David and the Concubines". "Abraham's Wives". "Stoned for Adultry". "I was King David's Sex Slave". "Uriah's Wife". etc.

And of course once you start prosecuting these cases kids will get more interested in the Bible. Not necessisarily in the sections you had hoped.

My advice: If thine eye offend thee pluck it out. I believe that is Biblical too and will permanently solve the problem. Of course we will need laws allowing the moral to blind their own children but it would be a small sacrifice to prevent the transmission of corruption.

Ascroft was right to drape naked justice. Think of what seeing that could do to poor innocent children.

You know all this sex hysteria comes about because we are separated from the source of our food. The barn yard. In the past it was much harder to separate kids from the facts of life.

--==--

This is like campaign finance "reform". There will be unintended consequences re: free speech.

Then there is the internet.

How we gonna enforce American laws on the Dutch? Or in places where the age of consent is 14?

BTW how do you plan to handle breast feeding?

What ever happened to the good old Republican idea of personal responsibility. i.e. only do business with people whose judgement you trust.

What happens when the men with guns (government) that you have asked to solve your personal problems turn their guns on you?

What happens when Howard Stern starts reading and commenting on the "good parts" of the Bible? It would be a real yuck fest to see Ashcroft & Co. banning Bible reading on the radio or TV.

And just think that because all this is political the lefty anti-violence folks (you know violence is addictive and as the tolerance goes up ever more is required) ask for a quid pro quo.

You see once we breech the Constitutional "no law" barrier there is no end of good we can do. We can end hate speech, sex speech, violence speech, hurtful speech, etc. etc. etc. Think of how much better off we will be when all this bad speech is banned. We can finnaly put an end to sex pornography, war pornography, violence pornography, hate pornography, gun pornography, etc. etc. etc.

This will be better than the New Soviet Man. We will have the New Free Man. Free of all things evil. Won't that be good? We will finally be able to compete with Islam on an equal basis.

--==--

A fundamental mistake is to think that the laws will be enforced only to your satisfaction.

There are peole who consider "gun love" pornographic. What makes you think they will not get their say and influence? You have already alluded to that. You call their definitions false. Which may be true but it doesn't matter once you give them political power by breaching the "no law" barrier.

You will not be in charge of defining pornography. Some government agent you have no control over will be in charge. Which is why all this is so dangerous. Which is why making a Federal case out of your personal problems is not ever very wise.

Once you allow regulation of speech (just like regulation of guns) government will want more and more powers. The end result is that you will not stop the flow of pornography but you will put a big damper on free speech.

Ah. Well. There is never any holding back the people who want to help us at gun point. The left and right each have their own causes where they cannot get voluntary compliance and need violence and the threat of violence to get their way.

The sickness is in thinking the guns of the state can get you the world you want. It is a sickness of the left and the right. As long as the left and the right are in cahoots to avoid looking at the real nature of government (goverrnment is violence) liberty lovers in the land of the free are going to have a hard time.

What ever happened to Democracy, Whiskey, Sexy? Did that Iraqi individual understand Liberty better than we do?