[107985] in Cypherpunks
Re: children, porn, automata
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (mgraffam@idsi.net)
Sat Jan 30 23:55:33 1999
From: mgraffam@idsi.net
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 23:42:26 -0500 (EST)
To: Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>
cc: cypherpunks@toad.com
In-Reply-To: <199901310401.FAA12292@replay.com>
Reply-To: mgraffam@idsi.net
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Anonymous wrote:
> o-O
>
> This represents the infant Liberty getting buttfucked by Janet Reno
> with a strap-on.
>
> Do not export to Maine.
A suggestion...
Next time you want to wave the flag for liberty, do so responsibly.. you
do more harm than good by posting this.. it makes you sound like a damn
psycho.
I agree that this case is yet another chip out of our liberty, but to be
honest, it is not easy for many people to see this, and I can't
particularly blame them.
Having an image of some something should not be illegal. It should be (and
is) illegal to _make_ child porn, but not illegal to own it. Making it
victimizes a kid, viewing it doesn't. The prior restraint bullshit about
keeping people from child porn in order to "keep them in check" somehow
is just that.. bullshit.
On my shelf, I have several books that describe acts of horrible
brutality, and murder; some of those books have images of those acts. It
is not, and should not be illegal to own these Holocaust history books.
>
> >Maine Court Upholds Child Porn Law
> >
> > By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
> >
> > PORTLAND, Maine -- A federal appeals court upheld a federal
> > law that makes it illegal to possess computer images
Michael J. Graffam (mgraffam@idsi.net)
"..subordination of one sex to the other is wrong in itself, and now
one of the chief hindrances to human improvement.." John Stuart Mill
"The Subjection of Women"
