GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post

Joe Obenberger · 06-10-2013, 12:09 PM

No limits. And that means no limits.

A few words about the child pornography laws. Throughout the United States and most of civilized creation these days, an age limit has been set that defines, by the age of the performer, that anyone who possesses a work containing someone younger than 18 in a sexual situation is a serious pervert. In the US, it's five years for possession the first time through, ten years for distribution the first time through, and fifteen years for creatiion the first time through. But it's arbitrary and not based on science, human behavior, or cultural values. In fact, when the United States first adopted a child pornography statute thirty years ago, the age set was sixteen rather than eighteen.

In Illinois, it is normally no crime to have any kind of sex with a seventeen year old. In Michigan, it's 16. In Canada, till recently it was 14. The minimum marriage age in some US states varies from 13 on up. There are, of course, many milllions of mothers under the age of 18 and many thousands who've been married and divorced. Psychiatry looks at pedophilia as a condition in which men are attracted to children who are not sexually developed. But some of our most seriously punished crimes are aimed at men who possess or view content depicting fully developed females. Social and political correctness aside, men still look at females 15, 16, 17, and 18 years of age, and if you had a nickle for every rear end car collision in our major cities caused by a male driver staring at a provocatively dressed teenager instead of the road, you'd have a stack that reaches from here to the moon. And, despite the best urgings of the do-gooder community, that's simply normal male interest and not a sign of perversion. Men in every culture through history have been interested in youthfulness and virginity, and this is has been so universal that it appears to be part of the basic brain wiring.

If the aim of these laws is to re-wire the brains of men, it is inevitable that these laws will never succeed. In the legislative selection of an arbitrary age to define what is perverted, one that changes by geography and the direction of political winds, I think an absurdity has been created. When it's lawful to have anal sex with a seventeen year old in Chicago or a sixteen year old in Detroit, but a cell phone picture of her breast will put you on a lifetime sex offender registry, something very weird is taking place.

When all of these laws started one hundred years ago, they were aimed at the protection of innocent, naive girls from aggressive, rapracious predators and they made sense. The innocent state of the victim was an element of the early laws. When arbitrary age limits substituted for innocence, the laws diverged from their just purpose. When those age limits were arbitrarily set at 18, these laws became legislation designed to change actual human nature.

I'm a cynic. I have defended innocent men charged with child pornography and I have prevailed. One of them was a first-generation internet content producer named Mike Jones whose life was nevertheless destroyed.

I believe that the real point of child pornography laws is to give every law enforcement agent a basis for a warrant to invade personal computers, studios, and wireless devices. I've seen it happen when the cops actually knew that my client had nothing whatsoever to do with child pornography. It's just another tactic to destroy personal privacy, like the so-called war on terror.

God bless Bradley Manning who is suffering for our freedom as I write. God bless Edward Snowden whose crucifixion on account of our right to privacy is about to begin.

No limits.

When the First Amendment says that Congress shall enact "no law" abridging the freedom of speech, it means "no law" not just "some laws". I'm with Justice Douglas on that.

No limits.

06-10-2013, 12:09 PM
Joe Obenberger Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago Posts: 466	No limits. And that means no limits. A few words about the child pornography laws. Throughout the United States and most of civilized creation these days, an age limit has been set that defines, by the age of the performer, that anyone who possesses a work containing someone younger than 18 in a sexual situation is a serious pervert. In the US, it's five years for possession the first time through, ten years for distribution the first time through, and fifteen years for creatiion the first time through. But it's arbitrary and not based on science, human behavior, or cultural values. In fact, when the United States first adopted a child pornography statute thirty years ago, the age set was sixteen rather than eighteen. In Illinois, it is normally no crime to have any kind of sex with a seventeen year old. In Michigan, it's 16. In Canada, till recently it was 14. The minimum marriage age in some US states varies from 13 on up. There are, of course, many milllions of mothers under the age of 18 and many thousands who've been married and divorced. Psychiatry looks at pedophilia as a condition in which men are attracted to children who are not sexually developed. But some of our most seriously punished crimes are aimed at men who possess or view content depicting fully developed females. Social and political correctness aside, men still look at females 15, 16, 17, and 18 years of age, and if you had a nickle for every rear end car collision in our major cities caused by a male driver staring at a provocatively dressed teenager instead of the road, you'd have a stack that reaches from here to the moon. And, despite the best urgings of the do-gooder community, that's simply normal male interest and not a sign of perversion. Men in every culture through history have been interested in youthfulness and virginity, and this is has been so universal that it appears to be part of the basic brain wiring. If the aim of these laws is to re-wire the brains of men, it is inevitable that these laws will never succeed. In the legislative selection of an arbitrary age to define what is perverted, one that changes by geography and the direction of political winds, I think an absurdity has been created. When it's lawful to have anal sex with a seventeen year old in Chicago or a sixteen year old in Detroit, but a cell phone picture of her breast will put you on a lifetime sex offender registry, something very weird is taking place. When all of these laws started one hundred years ago, they were aimed at the protection of innocent, naive girls from aggressive, rapracious predators and they made sense. The innocent state of the victim was an element of the early laws. When arbitrary age limits substituted for innocence, the laws diverged from their just purpose. When those age limits were arbitrarily set at 18, these laws became legislation designed to change actual human nature. I'm a cynic. I have defended innocent men charged with child pornography and I have prevailed. One of them was a first-generation internet content producer named Mike Jones whose life was nevertheless destroyed. I believe that the real point of child pornography laws is to give every law enforcement agent a basis for a warrant to invade personal computers, studios, and wireless devices. I've seen it happen when the cops actually knew that my client had nothing whatsoever to do with child pornography. It's just another tactic to destroy personal privacy, like the so-called war on terror. God bless Bradley Manning who is suffering for our freedom as I write. God bless Edward Snowden whose crucifixion on account of our right to privacy is about to begin. No limits. When the First Amendment says that Congress shall enact "no law" abridging the freedom of speech, it means "no law" not just "some laws". I'm with Justice Douglas on that. No limits. __________________ Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice. . . Restraint in the pursuit of Justice is no virtue. Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964 Last edited by Joe Obenberger; 06-10-2013 at 12:24 PM..