Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleasurepays
how is it unconstitutional? why is it that the constitutionality of obscenity laws aren't being challenged if they aren't constitutional? i dont get it. i really don't. maybe i am missing something.
|
Some people have a more liberal view of our constitution. You have a strict constructionist view. There are those that believe that freedom of speech means that everyone has the right to express themselves how they want as long as it doesn't encroach on the life, liberty, or happiness of another individual. You on the other hand believe that unless the constitution specifically states that you have a right to express yourself a certain way, the government can make it illegal.
Now there is nothing wrong with either point of view. It's been an ongoing war of the Supreme Court for decades. It's insidious though to pretend that there is not an alternative viewpoint to yours on the definition of the constitution. There are 4 Supreme Court justices (maybe 5) who would side with the people in this thread that says it is their constitutional right to make this kind of pornography.
And just remember, your constructionist viewpoint isn't in the greatest company. Your view of the constitution is the same as those who felt blacks had no constitutional right to vote, own property, receive a fair trial, or even attend a public school. The same constructionist view that women had no rights to divorce, own property, vote, or choose what happens to their own body. That it was perfectly alright to create sedition laws and lockup those who spoke negatively of the government. That children had no rights and could be forced to work endless hours in factories. That you have no right to be put in front of a judge for a particular charge.