News Blog for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, liberty & individual freedom. Content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for or by this "Blog" - no paid ads - no payments for articles.Fair Use Doctrine is posted & used. Blogger/Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Contact: editor@arranewsservice.com (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home PageFollow @arra
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
(429-347 BC)
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Short Circuit on the 6th Circuit
Tony Perkins, Washington Update: A federal appeals court in Cleveland has struck down a 1988 federal child pornography recordkeeping law. The law requires porn producers to keep records with the proof of age of all people depicted in "actual sexually explicit conduct" to ensure that children are not being used. The problem Congress sought to address was not theoretical. The law was passed in the wake of findings by Attorney General Meese's Commission on Pornography that the porn industry was in fact using girls under the age of 18 in hardcore films, and this commonsense law was another way to help keep children away from this vicious industry. Yet the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals said the law was unconstitutional because it requires all producers to keep records, not just commercial producers. According to the Court, the recordkeeping requirements are too burdensome for non-commercial porn producers and violate their First Amendment rights. But doesn't this miss the point? Children are just as harmed by the sick people who produce child porn for the "fun" of it as the sick people who are in it for the money. Why should anyone who produces sexually explicit pornography be excused from proving that they're not exploiting children? The law was previously upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1994. The Department of Justice has not yet announced its next steps, but the 6th Circuit result must not stand. See also:Child porn law struck downTags:6th Circuit Court of Appeals, FRC, pornography, protecting children, Tony PerkinsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru - @arra
#Christian Conservative; Retired USAF & Grad Professor. Constitution NRA ProLife schoolchoice fairtax - Editor ARRA NEWS SERVICE. THANKS FOR FOLLOWING!
To Exchange Links - Email: editor@arranewsservice.com!
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting principles & beleifs beliefs of other organizations, this blog/site is soley controlled and supported by the editor. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Tony Perkins, Washington Update: A federal appeals court in Cleveland has struck down a 1988 federal child pornography recordkeeping law. The law requires porn producers to keep records with the proof of age of all people depicted in "actual sexually explicit conduct" to ensure that children are not being used. The problem Congress sought to address was not theoretical. The law was passed in the wake of findings by Attorney General Meese's Commission on Pornography that the porn industry was in fact using girls under the age of 18 in hardcore films, and this commonsense law was another way to help keep children away from this vicious industry. Yet the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals said the law was unconstitutional because it requires all producers to keep records, not just commercial producers. According to the Court, the recordkeeping requirements are too burdensome for non-commercial porn producers and violate their First Amendment rights. But doesn't this miss the point? Children are just as harmed by the sick people who produce child porn for the "fun" of it as the sick people who are in it for the money. Why should anyone who produces sexually explicit pornography be excused from proving that they're not exploiting children? The law was previously upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1994. The Department of Justice has not yet announced its next steps, but the 6th Circuit result must not stand. See also: Child porn law struck down 
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home