View Single Post
Old 06-06-2008, 10:42 AM  
Kevin Marx
Confirmed User
 
Kevin Marx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snake Doctor View Post
I see the morally superior pornographers are out in full force on this one. Why am I not surprised?

To me, it's like this. Max pissing in a girl's mouth, displayed on a billboard in the middle of town. That's obscene.
Max pissing in a girl's mouth, recorded on DVD, and shipped in a plain brown wrapper to someone who specifically requested that material and paid money for it, is free expression.

If you can't make that distinction, then you're not intelligent enough to understand the rest of this post, so please put me on ignore right now.

All freedoms come with a price.
Extreme pornography is the inevitable consequence of the free expression clause, the same way Scientology or the Branch Davidians are the inevitable consequence of the free exercise clause, the same way that the National Enquirer is the inevitable consequence of a free press, the same way that the Montana Militia Men are the inevitable consequence of the 2nd amendment.

Max Hardcore hasn't made your life harder anymore than the Jehovah's Witnesses have made life harder for Catholics. (Many communities directed laws against the Witnesses and many court battles ensued, but it didn't make it harder for anyone else to practice their religion)
The National Enquirer's constant publication of erroneous reports doesn't hurt the New York Times.
The Montana Militia Men don't make it harder for you to own a shotgun.

If there is any place where there should be a wholehearted embrace of the 1st amendment it should be here. Free expression can't just apply to things you like or things that don't offend you, it HAS TO apply to things that make you sick to your stomach or else it isn't really freedom.

Those of you who say Max was "asking for it" are delusional. "Asking for it" would be pissing in a girl's mouth in the middle of Times Square. He filmed sex acts (granted, deviant sex acts by almost anyone's standards) between consenting adults, and sold copies of the film to other adults who specifically requested it. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with that.

Televangelists make me sick to my stomach. I want to puke every time they speak in tongues or plant a staff member in a wheelchair so they can "heal them" or say that god's blessing awaits you if you just send money to their ministry.
I would rather watch 10 straight hours of Max taking a shit than 10 minutes of a televangelist.
Just because they offend me doesn't mean they don't have the right to do what they do. (They, by the way, do it in the middle of Times Square) Their offensiveness is even more egregious, because they specifically target their speech at people who don't wish to hear it, rather than limiting it to people who request it. Yet their rights are sacrosanct, and Max apparently has no rights.

Stick that in your irony pipe and smoke it.
It comes from a cheesy movie, The American President (Michael Douglas and Annette Benning), but its pretty much spot on with what you just said. Take something that is so patently offensive to you and defend someone else's right to do what they do... then you have freedom.

I don't agree with Max's content.. not my thing. But his ability to deliver that product to people that request it shouldn't be questioned. It's not against the law for adults to have sex. It's not against the law to film it. I find some of the things that come across the TV to be highly inappropriate for my kids, but as a responsible adult, I shut the TV off or change the channel. That kind of content is more accessible than what Max does. Where's the outcry about that? (it's never coming of course).
Kevin Marx is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote