Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

U.S. Justice Department Prepares Assault on Pr0n

michael posted about 10 years ago | from the shock-and-awe dept.

Censorship 1103

An anonymous reader writes "The Baltimore Sun is reporting that the Justice Department is preparing to reawaken old laws to fight the war on ... no, not terrorists... porn! And not just the kinky stuff either. In the age of Internet connectivity, will this mean these jobs are headed to India too?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


Say what? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785862)

In the age of Internet connectivity, will this mean these jobs are headed to India too?
They are going to outsource the DOJ? Good god, is nothing sacred?

Re:Say what? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785892)

Could be an improvement.

The problem is (2, Insightful)

GillBates0 (664202) | about 10 years ago | (#8786031)

that only small-time pr0n businesses and the ones who'll most likely suffer the most from this crackdown.

Apparently, if you're rich/famous (Janet Jackson) or a Warner or some large movie studio, you can get around the law by showing anything *but* the nipple on national TV. I have seen programs on "family" channels, which I couldn't watch with my family without a certain amount of awkwardness. And it's not just visuals...highly suggestive but just-under-the-legal-limit dialogs are okay too - if you are a large company.

I read in the article that they're planning to strike against some HBO programs too - and I hope they either go ALL the way, and get over their hypocrisy and sue everybody including their "pocket liners" in the industry OR even better, leave normal pr0n alone, and go after child-pr0n etc as is more logical/practical.


who cares? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785885)

In the age of Internet connectivity, will this mean these jobs are headed to India too?

Let's hope so. Indian women are hot.

Re:who cares? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785935)

Word of warning: Don't ever search for "indian woman" (without the quotes) on Google Image Search with filtering turned off.

How will this help Gas prices? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785888)

I fail to see how this war will help gas prices at all? What's the point? :)

Re:How will this help Gas prices? (5, Funny)

criordan (733016) | about 10 years ago | (#8785928)

It won't directly help lower gas prices. However, it will force us to walk places more often to burn off the calories that we used to lose doing other things.

Re:How will this help Gas prices? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786056)

I fail to see how this war will help gas prices at all? What's the point? :)

Well, all the fart fetish porn will surely shoot up in price.

Re:How will this help Gas prices? (2, Funny)

The_Mystic_For_Real (766020) | about 10 years ago | (#8786058)

This will have a definite effect on gas prices. Although their will be a drop in price on oil used for lubrication, more people will be driving to brothels, so we will have to wait and see what this actually does.

Hindi for Bukkake? (5, Funny)

Akai (11434) | about 10 years ago | (#8785889)

I for one welcome our new Indian porn actresses.

Re:Hindi for Bukkake? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786090)


http://www.bollywoodpicturesgallery.com/madhuri.ht m

http://website.lineone.net/~narin_sian/madhuri/inf ormation/madhuri-dixit-world.htm


Pointless (5, Insightful)

Tango42 (662363) | about 10 years ago | (#8785891)

All mediums are used for porn almost as soon as they are made, and AFAIK none has every stopped being used. No laws are going to stop it.

Re:Pointless (5, Funny)

Flakbait (742565) | about 10 years ago | (#8785994)

Yeah, I can still remember about the first readings of erotic material over the telegraph back in the 1800's...


Re:Pointless (5, Insightful)

macshit (157376) | about 10 years ago | (#8786069)

Very true, but I suspect this has more to with:
  1. election-season wooing of the hard right, and
  2. the fact that our attorney general is a prudish freak (or is that a freakish prude?).

Re:Pointless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786088)

He can't be both?

If they can not get OBL, (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785894)

then lets go after the easy targets.

It is amazing what an election year can cause with regard to a countries policies and priorities.

Re:If they can not get OBL, (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786016)

Agreed. Additionally, this will be one of the best unintentional favors the Republicans can do for the Kerry campaign... the other being the war on Howard Stern.

Here's to hoping this is all it takes to swing things back to the Democrats. I can't believe we'd forgotten how things get when they're not in charge.

They can take my pr0n when... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785895)

...they pry it from my glazed, sticky fingers!

Fewer chargebacks to credit card companies (5, Insightful)

Lord Grey (463613) | about 10 years ago | (#8785896)

From the article:
Any move against mainstream pornography could affect large telephone companies offering broadband Internet service or the dozens of national credit card companies providing payment services to pornographic Web sites.
While the article doesn't explicitly say if the "affect" would be positive or negative, it implies the negative. From my experience with the credit card companies, however, I would think that they would love to be able to rid themselves of at least some of the porn business. The largest percentage of chargebacks are, I believe, due to porn purchases using stolen or manufactured card numbers. Reducing those chargebacks would be a good thing for them.

Re:Fewer chargebacks to credit card companies (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785974)

I like Indian pr0n :-)

Re:Fewer chargebacks to credit card companies (1)

NineNine (235196) | about 10 years ago | (#8786055)

That has already happened. Most large porn companies simply do not accept credit cards from 3rd world countries at all now. If somebody from a 3rd world country wants to buy porn, they have to do it via their phone bill. I believe it was VISA that cracked down severly over a year ago, and pretty much, in you're in Vietnam or any former Soviet country, you're not gonna be able to buy porn with credit cards, and even in 1st world countries, there's quite a lot of new security in place.

Re:Fewer chargebacks to credit card companies (1)

ctxspy (94924) | about 10 years ago | (#8786083)

I was under the impression that they make money on both ends.

They take lets say 2.5% on the original 'purchase'. If there's a chargeback by the consumer, then the company that put the payment through gets hit for another 2.5% of the purchase.

ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785899)

slashdot article... too easy... brain explodes....

cue the 800+ pr0n jokes (then they came for the pr0n, youll pry my pr0n from my cold dead hands, in soviet russia pr0n fucks you, etc) in 3... 2... 1...

Let me guess... (3, Funny)

Iberian (533067) | about 10 years ago | (#8785901)

They are going to say the pr0n you download isn't yours and that you can't make copies.

Another Internet Black Day? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785905)

If this law is enforced will everyone once again turn their backgrounds black? Should be nifty and sad at the same time.

I wonder.. (2, Funny)

HeLLLight (748979) | about 10 years ago | (#8785907)

how I would get a job there. Everytime I try to browse pRon at work from 9-5 my boss gets quite annoyed and threatens to end my contract. This guy is getting PAID to do it??!! And he is ALLOWED to??!!

Happy Belated April Fools? (1)

Snowbeam (96416) | about 10 years ago | (#8785917)

Is this a joke? Wait, the most serious stories I have seen in the past 7 days were on April Fools.... GMAIL by google.

India... (1)

dolo666 (195584) | about 10 years ago | (#8785918)

> will this mean these jobs are headed to India too?

Yeah I can see all the porn stars moving to India. Imagine the next volley of Playboy TV: "Candy Suxxx: Bombay Butts", "Candy Suxxx: Lucky Lucknow"... et cetera.

I used to work for a porn site back in .com days (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785919)

Let me tell you, Indian porn was a big draw. The English love it.

First Pr0n!!1! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785922)


luckily (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785925)

luckily for me i have enough porn to last a life time. god bless Bram Cohen (creator of bittorrent)

Jesus Tapdancing Christ. (1)

James A. M. Joyce (764379) | about 10 years ago | (#8785927)

Don't they realise that it seems moronic to declare a War on Porn all of a sudden? Why didn't they start back in the 70s when it started on Usenet and elsewhere? They're just hypocritical. I bet there's some lobbyist pulling the strings behind the scenes. The whole thing just reeks through-and-through of bullshit.

I've never understood why sex is taboo in the U.S. (4, Insightful)

Sexual Ass Gerbil (728400) | about 10 years ago | (#8785933)

You'd think with it's war against religious fundamentalists in other countries (and one in which the Bush administration was touting that one of the reasons for attacking these countries is the lack of freedom the countries allow their citizens), that the U.S. would eliminate it's own Taliban killjoys. Nope. Instead these strict politicians get elected to office. My opinion is that people are just about the same no matter where in the world you go.. whether it's Afghanistan or the U.S.. the only difference is the magnitude of how corrupt the power hungry people have become.

Re:I've never understood why sex is taboo in the U (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785992)

I'm eagerly awaiting my copy of Sexual Ass Gerbil Does Dallas.

Re:I've never understood why sex is taboo in the U (5, Informative)

User 956 (568564) | about 10 years ago | (#8785995)

Asscroft wasn't elected. He was appointed.

Re:I've never understood why sex is taboo in the U (1)

Verrou (609915) | about 10 years ago | (#8786084)

You are a moron... One of the thousands of differences between the Taliban and the U.S. Government is that as you stated in your post our 'strict politicians' get elected to office... If you don't like it vote 'em out. Can you do that in Afghanistan?

Why does this not surprise me? (5, Informative)

thesolo (131008) | about 10 years ago | (#8785934)

This is of course being spear-headed by John Ashcroft, a very conservative christian. The very same John Ashcroft who spent $8000 of taxpayer money [thevoicenews.com] to cover up the bare breast of the statue of Lady Justice [commonlaw.com].

He once gave a speech at Bob Jones university [spectacle.org], that contained such amazing lines as "Unique among the nations, America recognized the source of our character as being godly and eternal, not being civic and temporal. And because we have understood that our source is eternal, America has been different. We have no king but Jesus."

If he's offended by the bare breast of a statue, just imagine what he thinks of porn. That this man holds public office frightens me very, very much.

Re:Why does this not surprise me? (3, Funny)

Homology (639438) | about 10 years ago | (#8786018)

This is of course being spear-headed by John Ashcroft, a very conservative christian

Compared to Ashcroft, Atila the Hun appears to be a flaming leftist liberal.

Re:Why does this not surprise me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786033)

Make sure to thank you conservative friends.

Thanks fuckers!

Can't wait for the election (0, Troll)

rhysweatherley (193588) | about 10 years ago | (#8785937)

I'm not a USAian, but even I can't wait for the Presidential election at the end of the year. Please, vote these right-wing idiots out and do the world a favour. Enough is enough.

Re:Can't wait for the election (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786085)

Ok, sure I'm not the only one who read something other than election...

"Ooh, ooh, ohh, I got election"

It's all Asscroft's fault (5, Insightful)

User 956 (568564) | about 10 years ago | (#8785940)

This from a man who is *so offended* by the statue of Justice in the Supreme Court building, he ordered it covered up [bbc.co.uk].

Talk about a right-wing freako nutcase. This is our government, folks. Get used to 4 more years when Bush steals the election again in November.

Re:It's all Asscroft's fault (4, Insightful)

0x0d0a (568518) | about 10 years ago | (#8786042)

If that isn't the most symbolic action of Ashcroft's rule, I don't know what is.

Wow (1)

HadesX (181501) | about 10 years ago | (#8785943)

I can't believe that the DOJ is focusing on this now.
With everything else that they could focus on they are going to waste thier time on this.

Well I guess it is not completely unexpected as we all know that Ashcroft covered up the semi-nude statue.

Asscrooffft (1)

Veramocor (262800) | about 10 years ago | (#8785944)

Alright everybody in unison say it like Captain Kirk in Wrath of Kahn. Khan!!!! [khaaan.com]


PS: Ass not Ash is intentional.

Lam Nguyen? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785949)

I certainly hope he is not looking at Tila Nguyen's porno.

Just shut down www.GirlsPooping.com ! (really!!!!) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785954)

The FBI US DOJ Just shut down www.GirlsPooping.com ! (really!!!!)

forced a married couple to sell home, lose all assets... and even lost the domain!!!!

they only had tame scat videos too. very tame.

the fbi is after all porn not just poop videos now!!!

Pron (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785956)

Since when is Pr0n such a bad thing. If it wasn't for Pr0n, our children might be looking at Porn online.

Dear dear dear (5, Interesting)

Space cowboy (13680) | about 10 years ago | (#8785958)

Ashcroft, a religious man who does not drink alcohol or caffeine, smoke, gamble or dance,

The perfect antithesis then, to all the people who pay for the 'products' on sale. The line "Don't drink, don't smoke, what do you do?" springs to mind. Have you in fact checked he's still alive ?

Sure, I'm dead-set against kiddie porn - string them up by the bollocks and burn them over a slow fire. Sure, there are other people being exploited in this industry. Newsflash: there are people being exploited in *all* industries - it's just that society places a higher importance on sex than fishing, cooking, or cleaning (for example).

and has fought unrelenting criticism that he has trod roughshod on civil liberties in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, is taking on the porn industry at a time when many experts say Americans are wary about government intrusion into their lives.

Yep, now we see, he is dead. In the water that is. When a public figures decide to go on a non-popular crusade, they're dead men walking. I suppose there's an outside chance (only in the US, [grin]) that he *might* be right - witness the uproar over 1 cm^2 of female flesh after a certain kickabout recently... Naaah.


Re:Dear dear dear (2, Insightful)

NDPTAL85 (260093) | about 10 years ago | (#8786028)

He's NOT right. The uproar caused by the exposed breast of Janet Jackson comes from people who are sexually repressed and conflicted due to the unhealthy mores of their various religions.

The last thing we should do is encourage this type of repression.

Re:Dear dear dear (2, Funny)

Caharin (690600) | about 10 years ago | (#8786070)

Sure, I'm dead-set against kiddie porn - string them up by the bollocks and burn them over a slow fire.
Come on, those kids have it bad enough, you wouldn't be helping any by burning them!

Re:Dear dear dear (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786089)

He did lose the Missouri govenor's race to a dead man...

That's normal (5, Funny)

Dinjay (571355) | about 10 years ago | (#8785959)

"Lam Nguyen's job is to sit for hours in a chilly, quiet room devoid of any color but gray and look at pornography"

Hmm...sounds like a day in the life of the /. crowd. It's just as well it cold in there...

Gotta love this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785969)

From the article:

(..) He said pornography "invades our homes persistently though the mail, phone, VCR, cable TV and the Internet," and has "strewn its victims from coast to coast."

Okay, it sounds like it's a virus or a mass murderer or something. It's PORN! The most natural thing in the world!

Re:Gotta love this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786077)

America: "I'll just pop in this VIDEO CASETTE, I'm sure it won't be anything harmful... FBI warning, yes... Previews... OH GOD, NASTY PORNO! Ma, get my gun! There's harmful pornography in the house that needs a killin'!"

Economy bad! Let's make it worse! (-1)

yroJJory (559141) | about 10 years ago | (#8785977)

Let's see, we've had the worst economy in decades, so let's attack a harmless portion of that economy that hasn't fallen prey to BushCo's efforts to put all the money into the hands of the richest 1%.

That's wonderful. I'm so glad I live in the open-minded USA.

Re:Economy bad! Let's make it worse! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786039)

Worst economy in -decades-? What economic numbers are you looking at?

no chance (1, Flamebait)

Dwindlehop (62388) | about 10 years ago | (#8785980)

Good luck. I'd say community standards have outgrown Ashcroft and Taylor's antiquated worldview. The guy sitting in the room clicking through porn isn't ridding the world of bad guys as he claims, he's trying to force his religious beliefs on a population which isn't going to let him.

Dear Mr. Bush (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785985)

When you've fucked up the economy.

When you've screwed up the war on terror.

When you've got us a parriah nation because of the Iraqi quagmire.

Hey! Lets go after howard stern and HBO porn!

Yeah! That'll fool the idiots in voter land.

The funny part... some of you idiots will endorse this action. I hope you die of cancer.

Way To Go Rightwing Freaks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8785990)


A fucking empty suit for a president and a nutcase for a attorney general.

Three Cheers (5, Insightful)

Lord_Dweomer (648696) | about 10 years ago | (#8785996)

Three cheers for the stupidest attempt at controlling Americans since Prohibition and the War on Drugs.

I mean, seriously, of all the things they could have picked........if there's anything us Americans like more than our booze and weed its porn and sex. Is Ashcroft BEGGING to have a lynch mob show up at his front door?

Is Ashcroft insane? (5, Insightful)

freeweed (309734) | about 10 years ago | (#8786004)

No, really.

The only possible conclusion I can draw from this is "I don't partake, therefore it's bad and no one else should be able to, either". I guess this is the same line of thinking that still has people up in arms against homosexuality. "They're doing something I wouldn't do! Let's get 'em!".

Ashcroft, a religious man who does not drink alcohol or caffeine, smoke, gamble or dance

Great, so we better shut down Nevada, kill all breweries, tobacco companies, coffee importation, and *gasp* Rock and/or Roll while we're at it!

They're going to try to go after a multi-billion dollar industry because its material "is obscene by community standards". Um, just who exactly do these people think are paying these billions? Hate to break it to you, folks, but Mr. and Mrs. Joe American. Consentual pornography is, by definition, acceptable by community standards. There wouldn't be so much of it if it wasn't.

My response: (1)

mrpuffypants (444598) | about 10 years ago | (#8786007)


Why does it aleays happen to the wonderful things???? This is the best reason for going to LAN parties!!!


The problem with Christians... (4, Insightful)

0x0d0a (568518) | about 10 years ago | (#8786009)

...is that instead of turning the other cheek, so many of them are bound and determined to be assholes about content that they don't like, but other people do.

I think Martin Luther put it best when he pointed out that chastity was unrealistic and stupid to try to hold priests to.

Most groups don't seem to try to legislate morality on other folks. I don't agree with, say, ecoterrorism, but I don't think that radical environmentalist speech should be suppressed. But religious conservative types *do* try to mobilize and dictate what content people want to view (or at least make it more difficult and uncomfortable for them.)

Nice job! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786012)

So the dude's job is to look at porn all day, every day? What a nice, comfy... government job! And talk about "perks"...

I'm glad my tax dollars are going to help pay for his various porn subscriptions.

Federal Porn Budget line item: $xxx,xxx dollars

next..... (1)

Roskolnikov (68772) | about 10 years ago | (#8786015)

Outsourced Government, how very colonial. Seriously though a war on porn? Who decides what is offensive? Oh, wait, thats right we're a democracy.

As we push each industry out we reduce the influence we have on them. What would US copyright and patent laws do without some form of localized content creation?

Pop up some popcorn, this one will be a show.

I work in the industry (5, Interesting)

jCaT (1320) | about 10 years ago | (#8786023)

And frankly, a lot of companies are scared. At this point everybody is just making sure their 18 USC 2257 [cornell.edu] links are up to date, and hoping for the best. The company I work for recently stopped selling videos (actually, before the Extreme Associates case) for the reasons listed in the article... and we've maintained a list of states that we will not send tapes to, exactly for the reason that got EA busted. That whole inter-state commerce thing can really get you in trouble.

If they are actually going to go after the major TV and cable networks over their hardcore stuff, the industry as a whole is screwed. The majority of the "good" sites out there now make the spice channel look like hotel porn.

I just hope that Bush gets voted out in november, so that we can ditch Ashcroft. He is completely out of touch with morality in this country! I'm not trying to say we should be selling explicit hardcore porn from vending machines, it has its place in our culture, and he and his cronies seem to not see that.

Priority before 9/11 (1)

stryck9 (670369) | about 10 years ago | (#8786032)

This was Ashcroft's top priority before 9/11. He must have enough time on his hands to pursue it now.

Best quote (4, Funny)

Lord_Dweomer (648696) | about 10 years ago | (#8786038)

Best quote from the article:
"This job, which Nguyen does earnestly from 9 to 5, surrounded by a half-dozen other "computer forensic specialists" like him, has become the focal point of the Justice Department's operation to rid the world of porn."

First, where do I sign up, and second, I sure as hell hope there are at least cubicle dividers between these "computer forensic specialists".

FBI Investigation into porn cinema - urban legend? (1)

SmackCrackandPot (641205) | about 10 years ago | (#8786040)

Reading this article reminds me of an urban legend I heard about. Apparently one time, there was a complaint made by someone about a cinema which was playing porn movies or at least one porn movie. For some reason or another, the FBI were called in to investigate. In order to carry out their investigation, the two agents had to enter the cinema, buy some tickets and write detailed notes about one or more movies. After hearing about this, the owner filed a FOI request, and got the transcripts; which amounted to a reversed engineered script of each movie.

How will they enforce the "laws"? (1)

phyrebyrd (631520) | about 10 years ago | (#8786047)

How can they enforce laws which invade upon one's privacy? Laws which the Supreme Court has already said are unlawful by their very nature of intrusion?

If I remember correctly, there was a case not too long ago, in which the Supreme Court said something to the effect that, anything that happens behind the doors of your own home (whether physical, or digital) is your right to do or view.

How will the enforce laws which directly contradict this? Could get interesting, indeed.


Oh no! (1)

lightspawn (155347) | about 10 years ago | (#8786049)

Well, it sounds like the internet is going to be depornified any day now. Better download everything while you still can.

P.S. Did any censorware companies make a campaign contribution lately?

Unwinnable? (4, Insightful)

wfberg (24378) | about 10 years ago | (#8786053)

While obscenity is a Federal crime, the standards applied are "community standards".. So right-wing nutheads from will be determining what's "obscene" in San Fransisco. Presumably, pictures of gay couples getting "married" would be found obscene...

And you've got to love this:
The ensuing years saw an explosion of porn, so much so that critics say that Americans' tolerance for sexually explicit material rivals that of Europeans.

NOOOOOOoooooooooooo!!!! Think of the Children! They'll grow up to be all, all.. European-like!!
Can't have that happening!

Can't the FCC step in and prohibit the use of the words fuck, shit, piss, cunt, motherfucker, cocksucker and tits? (New CHEESE tits!)

Well, not all bad (1)

Sargerion (712886) | about 10 years ago | (#8786054)

I'm not too sure about them messing around with the normal stuff, but some of the really so-called "kinky" stuff out there just pollutes the whole batch for people who don't like young Hatian boys' feet. I mean, c'mon, who needs that crap? Maybe it will help to legitimize the online Pr0n industry while they're at it. Which might be nice in many situations, though not all. Over all I don't think they're really going to make that big of a difference. For me anyway. However, for all your French-Maids-Getting-Raped-By-Aliens pr0n lovers out there, you may have something to fear.

-1 offtopic (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786059)

whats happened to all the -1 posts? im browsing at minus one, but the lowest any of the posts are is 0.. surely - SURELY in a thread such as this, there's gotta be a -1 post.

Are they being deleted as soon as they get to -1 now?

I thought Republicans were for free markets (5, Insightful)

Mrs. Grundy (680212) | about 10 years ago | (#8786066)

From the article:
Department officials say they will send "ripples" through an industry that has proliferated on the Internet and grown into an estimated $10 billion-a-year colossus profiting Fortune 500 corporations such as Comcast, which offers hard-core movies on a pay-per-view channel.

It's interesting that the government looks for market-based solutions to behavior that actually kills people like dumping mercury into the air, serving arsenic-laden water to towns, or creating vehicular death-traps but when you offend their puritan sensibilities they go for the jugular--even when the market clearly says that a HUGE chunk of the electorate is all for a little obscenity.

Political Motive (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786072)

The WH admin is pushing its opinions before they are out of office. I see in this a political motive.

Censorship is, and always was, unconstitutional. (1)

biendamon (723952) | about 10 years ago | (#8786074)

The problem with attempting to legislate morality is that the inevitable question of whose morality is being legislated must be asked.
In the case of pornography and erotica in the United States, the morality in question almost always stems from conservative Christian interpretations of moral and immoral behavior based on the bible (side note: conservative Christians are not only found on the religious right; there are plenty of Christians on the left who are conservative about this issue).
In the end, a legal argument whose fundamental principles are rooted in religion is an invalid argument. It becomes impossible to be sure that the imposition of laws based on religion don't conflict with the First Amendment. In other words, John Ashcroft (as a Christian) does not have the right to make it more difficult for me (as an agnostic) to view whatever material I deem appropriate for myself. This has been established in cases that have been considered precendent-setting at the Supreme Court level.
So John Ashcroft can suck my big, fat, hairy...

Thanks John (4, Insightful)

fresh27 (736896) | about 10 years ago | (#8786081)

In a speech in 2002, Ashcroft made it clear that the Justice Department intends to try. He said pornography "invades our homes persistently though the mail, phone, VCR, cable TV and the Internet," and has "strewn its victims from coast to coast." I hate it when I sit down for a nice family dinner and we get interrupted by a call from those pesky phone sex companies. Worse still are the unsolicited porno mags that I get in the mail daily. And there's nothing more annoying than coming home at night and finding a porno tape that somehow materialized in my VCR. Kudos to you John Ashcroft, you truly are a politician for the people.

Republican Views.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8786082)

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1112081/posts ?q=1&&page=1

Get an account and post what you think of this on this republican site.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account