Doer
Well-Known Member
Sky says there is a defacto. We must wait until the discuss-ee is available for rebuttal before we post yet another insult. I tend to agree with that, in part,.
Apparently, fuck the US constitution; Sodomy ruling not overturned regardless of Sup. Court decision
- Thread starter Ceepea
- Start date
Doer
Well-Known Member
No. This is where you issue microscopes first, so we could actually see it.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
"For God's sake, won't somebody think of the children?"
Ceepea
Well-Known Member
You do not have the right to choose if my child sees graphic imagery in a public place, much in the same sense that you do not have the right to show a child your cock and balls.
WORDZofWORDZCRAFT
Well-Known Member
ok cp
Ceepea
Well-Known Member
Another amazing post by the resident WORDZsmith.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
Political speech is not pornography. Children are not interested in political speech. Don't worry, your little snow flake will grow up to be as empty headed as you.
Ceepea
Well-Known Member
Displaying billboards of porno and dismembered human bodies is not political speech any more than indecent exposure in public is.
Are you for or against indecent exposure laws?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i'd be far more concerned if my child ended up espousing beliefs like you do.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
When did the anti abortion protesters at UCSB display pornography? Are you trying to be Unclebuck's understudy?
Ceepea
Well-Known Member
Are you blind?
...and dismembered human bodies......
...and dismembered human bodies......
desert dude
Well-Known Member
Political speech you don't like is porno and you get to ban it. Got it.
Ceepea, leave the propaganda to UB. You don't have the talent for it.
Ceepea
Well-Known Member
Ohhhh ok, you ARE blind.
por·nog·ra·phy
[pawr-nog-ruh-fee] Show IPA
noun
obscene writings, drawings, photographs, or the like, especially those having little or no artistic merit.
the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction
The U.S. Supreme Court has established that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment.
por·nog·ra·phy
[pawr-nog-ruh-fee] Show IPA
noun
obscene writings, drawings, photographs, or the like, especially those having little or no artistic merit.
the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction
The U.S. Supreme Court has established that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment.
por·nog·ra·phy
[pawr-nog-ruh-fee] Show IPA
noun
obscene writings, drawings, photographs, or the like, especially those having little or no artistic merit.
the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction
The U.S. Supreme Court has established that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment.
Look, neither myself nor UB can help it if you're an idiot and don't understand what 'porno' means. Your narrow, ignorant view is limited to the preconceived notion that 'porno' means 'genitals', which it does not.
You are wrong. We are right.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
leave me your address and i'll have 5 foot tall posters of my avatar all over your neighborhood.
otherwise, you're just a hypocrite.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
desert dude
Well-Known Member
Pay some taxes to support all the social programs you pretend to love, then you will be invited to my neighborhood. I don't tolerate fascists in my presence. I fart in your general direction.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
it's funny how you call dictionary definitions "propaganda" but not 5 foot tall pictures of aborted fetuses.
kinda like how you called the fact that race is a protected class "lies", "distortion", "racist", and "propaganda".
it's pretty clear to all watching that you are just swinging blindly in the dark at this point.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
You lefties that get a boner when looking at aborted fetuses are some sick SOBs.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/pornography
"The U.S. Supreme Court has established that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. The more troublesome question has been defining what is and is not obscene. In 1957, the U.S. Supreme Court, in roth v. united states, 354 U.S. 476, 77 S. Ct. 1304, 1 L. Ed. 2d 1498, stated that obscenity is "utterly without redeeming social importance" and therefore is not protected by the First Amendment. The Roth test for obscenity is "whether to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to a prurient [lewd or lustful] interest." The Roth test proved difficult to use because every term in it eluded a conclusive definition."
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/pornography
"The U.S. Supreme Court has established that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. The more troublesome question has been defining what is and is not obscene. In 1957, the U.S. Supreme Court, in roth v. united states, 354 U.S. 476, 77 S. Ct. 1304, 1 L. Ed. 2d 1498, stated that obscenity is "utterly without redeeming social importance" and therefore is not protected by the First Amendment. The Roth test for obscenity is "whether to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to a prurient [lewd or lustful] interest." The Roth test proved difficult to use because every term in it eluded a conclusive definition."