English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

15 answers

It is protected and there are restrictions. But, we can thank Bill Clinton and Janet Reno for the porn explosion. Not one single case of indecency was prosecuted under the Clinton administration. No other president can claim this.

My opinion, it shouldnt be protected but sadly its here to stay

2006-08-25 10:38:26 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

There are TONS of restrictions. I mean TONS. From National laws to city and county ordinances. There are some cities that cannot have any pornography anywhere!
It is covered by the first amendment and will never go away completely, no matter how much the government says.
The government really never attempts to kill off pornography all together, because it makes too much money for them. They just try to control it.

You should look at what they are trying to do with the regulations and get very scared as to what your government will attack next. The government has banned beastiality and abusive pornography, which is very good, and was not highly fought against by the industry. There are other areas they are trying to ban that should have you questioning things.
There newest target is Interracial pornography, in particular, the Black on White racial films. The government is trying to pass a law that a black man/woman cannot have sexual relations with a white man/woman on adult film. What is up with that???? They are all trying to put major restrictions on gay films too.

Maybe you should look into these restrictions, because if they are going after this industry, what stops them from coming into society and attempting the same thing?

2006-08-25 17:45:21 · answer #2 · answered by charice266 5 · 0 0

Pornography IS protected by the First Amendment and DOES have restrictions ( i.e, 18+). So what is the REAL question?

2006-08-25 17:34:50 · answer #3 · answered by Flea© 5 · 0 0

I think that there should be some restrictions because, as a child, I was sexually abused by a person who was heavy into pornography. Had there been some kind of restrictions back then, perhaps it would not have happened. BTW, the abuser was a teenager at the time.

2006-08-25 17:38:48 · answer #4 · answered by JEFFAVEGRL 4 · 0 0

Pornography IS protected under the 1st amendment. It's not a matter of opinion.

Yes, it should be restricted to showing things that are neither harmful nor illegal. Thus, child pornography should be restricted and those who publish it should be arrested.

2006-08-25 17:35:23 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

absolutely it is. why SHOULDNT it be covered by the first amendment? Because its nasty to some people?

The restrictions should only be when it comes to age, similar to smoking.

women are hardly sex slaves to porn. They chose to do it, just like an exotic dancer choses to do that, or like i can choose to be an engineer. People just have a pricetag on stuff. if they chose to sell it, its their choice. Thats like saying if were fat its mcdonnalds fault for being so tasty.

and its called a parents job to keep it out of their kids hands, hardly the job of the government. We shouldnt all have our rights infringed upon because youre a bad parent.

and speech and pornography ARE related. its their freedom of expression. THe only speech not protected is libel, slander, and obscenity (spoken). speech doesnt just mean the spoken word, it means our dress, it means our lifestyle. THe second you start giving up first amendment rights (even "bad" stuff like porn), you give the government the right to **** all over us.

2006-08-25 17:38:13 · answer #6 · answered by Kyle M 6 · 0 1

The 1st Amendment says "free speech".

Not free sex. Not free obscenity.

Liberals can't even read, trying to argue that "speech" and "pornography" are the same thing.

2006-08-25 17:34:09 · answer #7 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0 0

Pornography is getting to be a hot subject. It is bad!! Women are exploited and used as sex slaves for entertainment. It is close to rape and most of them feel forced to do it because the money is good. I don't see the difference between prostitution and porn your paying for their services either way.

2006-08-25 17:35:33 · answer #8 · answered by lvillejj 4 · 0 1

No it isn't & yes there should be huge restrictions. Children are innocent & should be left that way.

2006-08-25 17:34:07 · answer #9 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 0 0

yes it is, there are restrictions, you can't even get FREE porn online without a credit card to verifie your age.

2006-08-25 17:33:39 · answer #10 · answered by sikn_shadow_420 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers