Skip to main content

Children's Right to Porn?

The California appeals court ruled that libraries must not use computer filters to disallow kids from viewing Internet pornography. A San Jose Mercury News editorial inferred that the First Amendment was invoked so the adult’s right to view porn would not be encroached.

One can see the Civil Liberties Union-who won the case- standing with hand over heart as the Constitution upheld this new right.

If Internet smutt is authorized why not have smutty magazines lying around the newspaper section. Also, we mustn’t forget the kid’s right to check out dirty magazines and videos.
It would never get that far because parents don’t allow their children into porn shops. The libraries funding would soon be voted down.

Why aren’t parents angered by library Internet obscenity? It is the same reason abortion is legal while infanticide is not.

Babies and dirty magazines can be seen, but babies in the womb and Internet porn usually are unseen by parents. Of course, the media could show the American public killings of unborn babies and kids looking at public funded Internet smutt.

But, the national media wants to preserve our Constitutional rights so they bans or prohibits those dangerous images. Thus, for the sake of the First amendment they in practicality prohibit our First Amendment rights.

All the news and drama stories-on primetime- are about courageous feminist saving women from back street abortions. Or, valiant publishers fighting against hypocrite who would destroy our freedom.

They can hide the truth because the evidence is not easy to see. As with Clinton, if not caught red handed they lie. When caught they will spin it in their favor.

If you ask the representatives of the media: why isn’t it, also, a child’s right to check out porno magazines and videos? Why is it wrong to show killed unborn babies when it was right to present dead G.I. in the Vietnam War? Why is it right to take hidden cameras into Crisis Pregnancy Centers, but wrong to use hidden cameras to catch kids watching public funded smutt? They will do a Clinton, if you ask these questions.

As Clinton switched from, ”I don’t know that [Monica] woman,” to” Sex is not that big a deal.” They will switch from; “We are only trying to preserve our Constitutional rights,” to the classic Kenneth Starr spin,” Why are you so obsessed with sex?”

We will never get a straight answer from the cultural elite, so we must ask ourselves the questions. How perverted is our country when we allow a president to sexually abuse a girl just out of high school? How corrupt are our courts and media when they promote a child’s right to pornography.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Exorcist Fr. Ripperger is asking everyone to say this Prayer until the Election is Resolved"

A good friend of the Catholic Monitor got this from a group message. She said "exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger is asking everyone to say this prayer until the election is resolved": Prayer of Command In His Name and by the power of His Cross and Blood, I ask Jesus to bind any evil spirits, forces and powers of the earth, air, fire, or water, of the netherworld and the satanic forces of nature.  By the power of the Holy Spirit and by His authority, I ask Jesus Christ to break any curses, hexes, or spells and send them back to where they came from, if it be His Holy Will.  I beseech Thee Lord Jesus to protect us by pouring Thy Precious Blood on us (my family, etc.), which Thou hast shed for us and I ask Thee to command that any departing spirits leave quietly, without disturbance, and go straight to Thy Cross to dispose of as Thou sees fit.  I ask Thee to bind any demonic interaction, interplay, or communications.  I place N. (Person, place or thing) under the protectio

High-profile Lawyer Barnes: Amy Coney Barrett would be a Disaster

High-profile trial lawyer Robert Barnes who deals in civil, criminal and constitutional law reported on Twitter that Amy Coney Barrett would be a disaster. The Barnes Twitter report shows that Coney Barrett has " sid[ed] with the government on the lockdowns, on uncompensated takings, on excusing First Amendment infringements & Fourth Amendment violations... [and] exclaimed the benefits of Jacobson, the decision that green-lit forced vaccines & carved out an emergency exception to Constitutional protection in "public health" or "emergency" cases used to justify forced sterilizations & detention camps... [and] hid behind precedent... to prohibit pro-life activists from exercising their free speech ." The Avvo.com lawyer directory reports that attorney "Robert Barnes embraces the challenge to defend the little guy and stand up for what is right. This is why he left the prestigious Yale Law School, whom publicly stated their unwill

If Kamala Harris' Father is part White & part Jamaican African and her Mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black?

  Is Joe Biden's running mate really Black? If Kamala Harris' father is part white and part Jamaican African and her mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black? Reason.com tries to figure it out: Kamala Harris, Joe Biden's pick to be the Democratic Party's vice-presidential nominee, is the daughter of an Indian immigrant mother and a Jamaican immigrant father. Her father, as I understand it, has ancestors of both European and African origin. [Welcome new Volokh readers. FYI, I've been working on a book on the American Law of Race, with this forthcoming article the first relevant output. My own opinion is that Ms. Harris should be deemed American, period, but there is no such box on government forms, and if you decline to state your race, someone will decide for you… First things first. There is no multiracial or mixed-race category in American law in any jurisdiction. Nor is there an Indian category. So Harris cannot be legally Indian, nor can she b