{    Cnytr   }

{Thursday, September 02, 2004  }

.:{If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for everything}:.


Friends, Americans, countrymen,

Lend me your eyes!

I come to bury pornography, not to praise it!

I received an email today from Patrick McGrath of Morality in Media, Inc. based in NYC, introducing me more extensively to their websites, saying that "both of our sites have other resources on treatment and healing. We are also extensively linked on Dads.org."

Excellent! I have great faith in Dads.org, and looking at their website makes me very happy.

MoralityInMedia.org
Obscenitycrimes.org -- "A resource for educating the public and for reporting possible violations of obscenity laws"

Notice the link between pornography and violent sex crimes. Many many examples from actual police reports -- concrete evidence, not made-up psycholgy stuff.

And how YOU can get involved and do your part to protect men, women and children against the harmful effects of pornography: ask your Representative to support H. Con. Res. 298, which can be read by going to thomas.loc.gov and typing in "H. Con. Res. 298". I think it's a really good resolution, so I shall post it at the end of the post.

But -- write a letter! They *really do* work and help and you're getting involved and standing up for what you believe in. Even if you don't believe in it, or believe in anything, do it for the other people you'll be helping by printing out a form letter, writing, then signing your name and spending 30-howevermany cents on postage. I tell you what, if you do that, I will personally mail you a stamp to make up for the cost of postage that you spent sending that one dinky little letter.

You think I'm kidding. Take a picture, show me it went out, and I'll do it.

I am proud to say that my Representative, Virgil Goode of the 5th district of Virginia, is a supporter of H. Con. Res. 298! I think I'll name my first child H. Con Res. 298...

The President is also in support of this an anti-obscenity whatsits ...

And it just gets better on Obscenitycrimes.org (though, that is a very odd statement...) there is help for parents, help for porn victims and addicts, the porn problem and solutions, and a very very interesting section on Porn and the First Amendment.

Excellent source. I don't have time to go into it too in-depth right now, but I *did* just call (from Italy) my representative and tell him I was in support of H. Con. Res. 298 and thanked him for being a supporter too.

Go to house.gov to find your representatives and get involved today! This is your privilige as an American -- don't throw it away!

And don't forget to register to vote!!!

~~~

Expressing the sense of Congress supporting vigorous enforcement of the Federal obscenity laws. (Introduced in House)

HCON 298 IH

108th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. CON. RES. 298

Expressing the sense of Congress supporting vigorous enforcement of the Federal obscenity laws.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

October 8, 2003

Mr. SULLIVAN (for himself, Mr. AKIN, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. CANNON, Mr. CHABOT, Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. ENGLISH, Mr. FORBES, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. GOODE, Mr. GOODLATTE, Ms. HART, Mr. HAYES, Mr. HOSTETTLER, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. OSBORNE, Mr. PENCE, Mr. PICKERING, Mr. PITTS, Mr. RYUN of Kansas, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. SOUDER, Mr. TERRY, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. VITTER, Mr. WELDON of Florida, Mr. WICKER, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, and Mr. WOLF) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress supporting vigorous enforcement of the Federal obscenity laws.

Whereas the Supreme Court in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) held that obscene material is `unprotected by the first amendment' (413 U.S. at 23) and that obscenity laws can be enforced against `hardcore pornography' (413 U.S. at 28);

Whereas the Miller Court stated that `to equate the free and robust exchange of ideas and political debate with commercial exploitation of obscene material demeans the grand conception of the first amendment and its high purposes in the historic struggle for freedom.' (413 U.S. at 34);

Whereas the Supreme Court in Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973) recognized that there are legitimate governmental interests at stake in stemming the tide of obscene materials, which include--

(1) protecting `the quality of life and total community environment' (413 U.S. at 58);

(2) protecting `public safety' (413 U.S. at 58);

(3) maintaining `a decent society' (413 U.S. at 59-60);

(4) protecting `the social interest in order and morality' (413 U.S. at 61); and

(5) protecting `family life' (413 U.S. at 63);

Whereas Congress, in an effort to protect these same legitimate governmental interests, enacted legislation in 1988 to strengthen Federal obscenity laws and in 1996 to clarify that use of an interactive computer service to transport obscene materials in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce is prohibited;

Whereas the 1986 Final Report of the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography found that `increasingly, the most prevalent forms of pornography' fit the description of `sexually violent material' (p. 323) and that `an enormous amount of the most sexually explicit material available' can be categorized as `degrading' to people, `most often women' (p. 331);

Whereas the Internet has become a conduit for hardcore pornography that now reaches directly into tens of millions of American homes, where even small children can be exposed to Internet obscenity and older children can easily find it;

Whereas a national opinion poll conducted in March 2002 by Wirthlin Worldwide marketing research company found that 81 percent of adult Americans say that `Federal laws against Internet obscenity should be vigorously enforced';

Whereas a May 2, 2002, report from the National Academies' National Research Council stated that `aggressive enforcement of existing antiobscenity laws can help reduce children's access to certain kinds of sexually explicit material on the Internet';

Whereas on April 16, 2002, the United States Supreme Court in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition invalidated a Federal law aimed at `virtual child pornography';

Whereas vigorous enforcement of obscenity laws can help reduce the amount of `virtual child pornography' now readily available to sexual predators; and

Whereas it continues to be the desire of the People of the United States of America and their representatives in Congress to recognize and protect the governmental interests recognized as legitimate by the United States Supreme Court in Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973): Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that the Federal obscenity laws should be vigorously enforced throughout the United States.
posted by Lauren, 2:36 PM

0 Comments:

Post a Comment