Originally Posted by pussyserver

GOD you are so fuckin stupid it amazes me!!


Pro-Con: Was the Supreme Court?s child-porn ruling reasonable? NO
The Supreme Court upheld a law that sweeps too broadly in its attempt to ban child pornography, which is repellent and illegal. Those who traffic in it must be punished, but this law is drawn in a way that also criminalizes speech that should be protected by the First Amendment.

The dissenters are right that the court should have made Congress pass a more carefully written law.

The court has traditionally been extraordinarily careful, as it must be, both to protect children and the right to free expression. It has upheld bans on sexually explicit photos of children that do not meet the legal standard of obscenity. But the court has emphasized that these free-speech exceptions are narrow.

If the court had struck down the offensive parts of the law, the damage to child-pornography prosecutions would be minimal.


The New York Times editorial




http://www.kansascity.com/273/story/634528.html

just one example