Supreme Court hears online porn case - GoFuckYourself.com

SWiTCH2 · 03-03-2004, 01:24 PM

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...us_online_porn

if you type "free porn" on a search engine, obviously you will find listings about that subject, what kind of moronic excuse is that?

SlickCash Sarah · 03-03-2004, 01:26 PM

Bush reminds me of a deer caught in headlights...dumbass

D-Money · 03-03-2004, 01:56 PM

They show soft core porn on the cable channels, go after them too then.

Webby · 03-03-2004, 02:09 PM

There is a valid case for "the protection of children", however this has been going on for years when several reasonable options could have been instigated to at least partially resolve the issue, - they were not.

Sad news is, it is election year again in the US and the hyprocacy rises once more.

When it gets to the level of outcrys over Jackson's tits - it's just too absurd - they are just tits - not uncommon! There are far more relevant issues to be dealing with than sanitizing US television still further.

Whatever the outcome of the Supreme Court, the fact remains that the US is not the net and I seriously doubt anyone will bother to observe some law of the US which may end up as some coverup of tits.

Although the majority of websites respect and adhere to section 2557, (only my opinion, but is a valid law), this is not obligatory for any webmaster not hosting in the US. I can't see anyone giving a shit about further restrictions under US law.

Anna_O · 03-03-2004, 02:21 PM

The problem with your country is that you can sue everyone for everything. What ever happened with your own/your parents responsibility?

03-03-2004, 01:24 PM	#1
SWiTCH2 Registered User Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 36	Supreme Court hears online porn case http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...us_online_porn if you type "free porn" on a search engine, obviously you will find listings about that subject, what kind of moronic excuse is that?

03-03-2004, 01:56 PM	#3
D-Money Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Player Del Ray Posts: 9,716	They show soft core porn on the cable channels, go after them too then. __________________ Still Ballin'

03-03-2004, 02:21 PM	#5
Anna_O Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 5,773	The problem with your country is that you can sue everyone for everything. What ever happened with your own/your parents responsibility? __________________ Fetish by Anna Paysite - Nylons Bondage Latex Lesbians Glamour Annas Dungeon - 70k / day Fetish TGP ICQ 246797915

03-03-2004, 01:26 PM	#2
SlickCash Sarah Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Toronto-I would rather DIE of thirst, then drink from the cup of MEDIOCRITY! Posts: 2,055	Bush reminds me of a deer caught in headlights...dumbass

03-03-2004, 02:09 PM	#4
Webby Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Far far away - as possible Posts: 14,956	There is a valid case for "the protection of children", however this has been going on for years when several reasonable options could have been instigated to at least partially resolve the issue, - they were not. Sad news is, it is election year again in the US and the hyprocacy rises once more. When it gets to the level of outcrys over Jackson's tits - it's just too absurd - they are just tits - not uncommon! There are far more relevant issues to be dealing with than sanitizing US television still further. Whatever the outcome of the Supreme Court, the fact remains that the US is not the net and I seriously doubt anyone will bother to observe some law of the US which may end up as some coverup of tits. Although the majority of websites respect and adhere to section 2557, (only my opinion, but is a valid law), this is not obligatory for any webmaster not hosting in the US. I can't see anyone giving a shit about further restrictions under US law.