NationStates Jolt Archive

The DOJ's main focus apparently won't be trying to stop child molestation, or child porn, but stopping the trade in "obscene" adult porn. Way to go Gonzalez. We always knew Jenna Jameson was a bigger threat to our society than some random kid toucher.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1125318960389

Aww crap.

I thought that the DOJ's tit fixation had ended when Ashcroft left and the statue returned to the lobby....

The DOJ's main focus apparently won't be trying to stop child molestation, or child porn, but stopping the trade in "obscene" adult porn. Way to go Gonzalez. We always knew Jenna Jameson was a bigger threat to our society than some random kid toucher.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1125318960389
Obviously. When people are forced to participate in pornography, it isn't that bad. But if they actually consent to do it, there's a major problem with them and we have to eradicate their pictures and send them to rehabilitation centres and make them pay for their treatment, too.

The DOJ's main focus apparently won't be trying to stop child molestation, or child porn, but stopping the trade in "obscene" adult porn. Way to go Gonzalez. We always knew Jenna Jameson was a bigger threat to our society than some random kid toucher.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1125318960389

Jesus Christ! Why don't he just wipe his ass with Million Dollar Bills! It'd be freakin' cheaper! And would be just as effective a policy. ;)

Obviously. When people are forced to participate in pornography, it isn't that bad. But if they actually consent to do it, there's a major problem with them and we have to eradicate their pictures and send them to rehabilitation centres and make them pay for their treatment, too.

Yeah...or maybe they feel threatened that the women are out of the "traditional" roles in society, and that Jenna Jameson is actually a very well spoken business woman..?

*rolls eyes*This government's priorities are rather backwards and sad.

*rolls eyes*This government's priorities are rather backwards and sad.
Major understatement.

WOW... I am speechless...

"Sources say Acosta was told by the FBI officials during last month's meeting that obscenity prosecution would have to be handled by the crimes against children unit. But that unit is already overworked and would have to take agents off cases of child endangerment to work on adult porn cases. Acosta replied that this was Attorney General Gonzales' mandate."

*shakes head in disbelief*

BAHAHAHAHA george w, arnold s and now this, whatever next :D

I'm not surprised.

I expect this kind of backwards thinking from those currently running our country.

Let's see. We have the ACLU actually trying to violate the rights of little boys by legalizing the raping of them, not even Bush can untangle the beauracratic mess of the US government if he tried, and now this.

Hmm next driving hybrid cars will be punishable by caning, gays will be sent to rehabilitation camps, and owning sex toys will be punishable by 20-year prison sentences.
Raping a 3-week old baby, however, will see you in jail for 3 months, with 6 months of probation after, that is, if you even get charged in the first place.

Let's see. We have the ACLU actually trying to violate the rights of little boys by legalizing the raping of them, not even Bush can untangle the beauracratic mess of the US government if he tried, and now this.


Feeling very trollish today?

The ACLU is not trying to legalize raping little boys. Quit getting all your 'news' from Bill O'Lielly and Rush The Hypocritical Pill Popper - there ARE credible news sources out there - that is if you are not joking/trolling and if in fact you actually believe the verbal diarreah you just unleashed on this thread.

Let's see. We have the ACLU actually trying to violate the rights of little boys by legalizing the raping of them, not even Bush can untangle the beauracratic mess of the US government if he tried, and now this.
No, we've got the ACLU protecting the rights of everyone who wants to speak his mind, even if he's disgusting. It's called free speech, and if you don't like it may I suggest you move to Iran?

The DOJ's main focus apparently won't be trying to stop child molestation, or child porn, but stopping the trade in "obscene" adult porn. Way to go Gonzalez. We always knew Jenna Jameson was a bigger threat to our society than some random kid toucher.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1125318960389

Gotta love it when fundies are in power...

Well, it's sort of what I expected from our government. We haven't been doing so well on the whole 'civil liberties' concept lately...
et's see. We have the ACLU actually trying to violate the rights of little boys by legalizing the raping of them
All I have seen the ACLU doing is protecting NAMBLA's right to free speech. I haven't seen them actually helping NAMBLA toward their goal of legalizing man/boy relationships.
EDIT:
http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=8100&c=86
NEW YORK--In the United States Supreme Court over the past few years, the American Civil Liberties Union has taken the side of a fundamentalist Christian church, a Santerian church, and the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. In celebrated cases, the ACLU has stood up for everyone from Oliver North to the National Socialist Party. In spite of all that, the ACLU has never advocated Christianity, ritual animal sacrifice, trading arms for hostages or genocide. In representing NAMBLA today, our Massachusetts affiliate does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children.

What the ACLU does advocate is robust freedom of speech for everyone. The lawsuit involved here, were it to succeed, would strike at the heart of freedom of speech. The case is based on a shocking murder. But the lawsuit says the crime is the responsibility not of those who committed the murder, but of someone who posted vile material on the Internet. The principle is as simple as it is central to true freedom of speech: those who do wrong are responsible for what they do; those who speak about it are not. <snip>

Jesus Christ! Why don't he just wipe his ass with Million Dollar Bills! It'd be freakin' cheaper! And would be just as effective a policy. ;)
That might .... constitute a titillating kind of porn ... in SOME people's minds ....
what about with a calico cat? Ashcroft was DEATHLY afraid of those.

It's the federal government, you can't expect them to spend the most amount of money on prosecuting real crimes.

Obscenity is defined in Roth basically as anything against current community standards (ie. anything that offends anyone).

Obscenity is defined in Roth basically as anything against current community standards (ie. anything that offends anyone).
Well, not just anyone, right - 'the community's'. So I guess they'll have to take a porn census and see just what is and what isn't morally acceptable for the majority of community members. That'd be a fun census. Except it'd suck.

The DOJ's main focus apparently won't be trying to stop child molestation, or child porn, but stopping the trade in "obscene" adult porn. Way to go Gonzalez. We always knew Jenna Jameson was a bigger threat to our society than some random kid toucher.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1125318960389
Good to know that our government doesn't trust adults to be able to decide what they look at. Ahh, those tax dollars are money well spent...

Maybe Jenna turned him down?

Get rid of porn and then the divorse rate will go down. Homosexuals will figure out they are straight. Pedophiles will start liking adult women. Drug and alchol consumption will lesson. Murder and rape crimes will lesson. Wars will stop. Everybody will convert to Christianity. Creationism will be taught. Battered wives will not happen. Child abuse will not happen. Racism will stop. Corporate Fraud will stop........

Glad to hear we are focused. Hmmmm *sighs*

You know something!

It makes sense.

If the FBI goes about raiding and taking everything then the goverment no longer has to pay for it!

The shrub is reducing goverment expenditures! ;)

Maybe Jenna turned him down?

Get rid of porn and then the divorse rate will go down. Homosexuals will figure out they are straight. Pedophiles will start liking adult women. Drug and alchol consumption will lesson. Murder and rape crimes will lesson. Wars will stop. Everybody will convert to Christianity. Creationism will be taught. Battered wives will not happen. Child abuse will not happen. Racism will stop. Corporate Fraud will stop........

Glad to hear we are focused. Hmmmm *sighs*
Hey, shut up, you cynical creature! It is a well-proven fact that stopping grownups from looking at pictures of naked ladies will bring about a world full of rainbows, puppies, and lots of pretty white Christian babies playing happily in fields of flowers.

what adult oriented porn is illegal? or is this some kind of porn industry push to get "pirated" porn off the net so they can make money from it again. there is quite a trade in copyrighted photos and videos on the net....

Let's see. We have the ACLU actually trying to violate the rights of little boys by legalizing the raping of them, not even Bush can untangle the beauracratic mess of the US government if he tried, and now this.


Dont accuse me of trying to legalize the raping of little boys, it could probably be construed as flame.

Let's see. We have the ACLU actually trying to violate the rights of little boys by legalizing the raping of them
Please provide a source for this claim.

Please provide a source for this claim.

He won't. He's above evidence. Have you forgotten he's a Republican?

what adult oriented porn is illegal? or is this some kind of porn industry push to get "pirated" porn off the net so they can make money from it again. there is quite a trade in copyrighted photos and videos on the net....
And when was the last time you saw a porn industry head complain about it? None, because they know they are making enough truckloads of money to not care about however much money they lose to illegal porn trading and make up charts to show they are losing cash to complain about it.

They're calling pornography a poison. Oh no, I'm wanking to a video of a naked woman. Dear god, no, I can't stop stroking my raw penis and I'm going to suffer in agony by bleeding to death. AHHHHHH, a burglar crashed through the window and shot me in the head before I could pull my hand out of my pants! PORNOGRAPHY caused my death! BAN PORNOGRAPHY!!!!!!1 Nevermind the fact that some jackass broke into my house and wasted me.

Talk about priorities.

Yeah...or maybe they feel threatened that the women are out of the "traditional" roles in society, and that Jenna Jameson is actually a very well spoken business woman..?

*rolls eyes*This government's priorities are rather backwards and sad.

Sounds like they're laying in the foundations for the Republic of Gilead donnit? Funny how shutting off one possible avenue where women have choices is more important than keeping a kid from being raped and murdered.

And that adds yet another reason to my massive list of why I will never vote for a neo or theo con.

Douchebags.

Oh, for the love of god.....


You've gotta be kidding me. I would understand if it was to stop kiddie porn, or something like it, but for normal, LEGAL, porn, it's incredible.

And here i thought that the Attorney General actually looked smart. Oh, well, i guess i shouldn't be surprised. Like this is the only project of Bush's government that spends people's money without a logical cause....

This is the only thing that can convey my shock and confusion.

http://upl.silentwhisper.net/uplfolders/upload0/ospikeclump.gif

That's right. A spike clump from Faxanadu.

I'm Christian and conservative (but not fanatical enough to call myself the Christian right). As a Christian I think porn is a bad thing, but it's probably somewhere below 1000 in my priority of things. I don't think the other Christians asking for something to be done about adult porn know of or would agree with the decision of prioritizing it above child molestation.

Besides, does anyone here actually like Gonzalez? When people thought Bush might nominate him for the court both liberals and conservatives where making a fuss. If anyone in our goverment is evil its him. Consider this is the guy who thinks torture is okay.

The ACLU doesn't support raping boys, but should a group be allowed to print documents advocating such a crime, describing how to commit such a crime, and describing how to get away with such a crime? Even if you agree that they should be allowed to print such things, should they be giving defending these people such a high priority. You can make the same complaint about the ACLU that is being made about the government. They are taking away resources that could be used to defend people who have had worse violations of their civil rights.

The ACLU doesn't support raping boys, but should a group be allowed to print documents advocating such a crime, describing how to commit such a crime, and describing how to get away with such a crime? Even if you agree that they should be allowed to print such things, should they be giving defending these people such a high priority. You can make the same complaint about the ACLU that is being made about the government. They are taking away resources that could be used to defend people who have had worse violations of their civil rights.

Did you read the article?

The Christian groups gave NAMBLA a boost as the DOJ is supposed to focus on adult porn.....

Did you read the article?

The Christian groups gave NAMBLA a boost as the DOJ is supposed to focus on adult porn.....

I read the article. But there are a couple things you missunderstand about my argument.

1. Christians are calling for prosecuting porn to be a priority, not necessarly the top priority. I think very few would prioritize it above child molestation.

2. Just because one or two Christian groups advocate something that doesn't mean it has Christian support as a whole. Us Christian conservatives are given a bad rep by our radical frindge members. Similarly when the US goverment does something it doesn't mean most Americans support it.

No, we've got the ACLU protecting the rights of everyone who wants to speak his mind, even if he's disgusting. It's called free speech, and if you don't like it may I suggest you move to Iran?


That's only if they agree with their political views. The ACLU is also contradictory at times, they were the ones in Roe v. Wade who said that the fetus wasn't living and was only a lump of cells. THEN in the Robert Harris case in California stated that that he was the victim of fetal alcohol syndrome. Now, how can they say that the fetus is only a mass of tissue and then turn around and say that it was affected by something, if it's only a mass of tissue it wouldn't be affected. That must mean that the fetus has a brain to be affected by fetal alcohol syndrome, which is what fetal alcohol syndrome affects.