High Court Upholds Block of Web Porn Law

[Danieljay]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=2&u=/ap/20040629/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_online_porn

"WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a law meant to punish pornographers who peddle dirty pictures to Web-surfing kids is probably an unconstitutional muzzle on free speech."

"The high court divided 5-to-4 over a law passed in 1998, signed by then-President Clinton (news - web sites) and now backed by the Bush administration. The majority said a lower court was correct to block the law from taking effect because it likely violates the First Amendment."



While I agree with this particular ruling, I ask myself if there ANY way we can protect our kids from porn online. I've seen and counseled with people whose lives have been destroyed by pornography and related sex addiction, most all of it beginning with pornography use at a young age (as early as 9). I've known 13 and 14 year old boys who are caught up in online sex addiction, and adults as well, it has become their drug of choice.

There must be some way to prevent porn spam, free "thumbnail" porn sites, and the rest from getting to our youth. Most kids can get around filters. Often times it shows up in email, unwanted pop-up adds, and pop up windows that wont stop unless one shuts down the computer. This is a huge problem for youth and adults alike.

Any suggestions? Do others besides me think this is a problem? I'm thinking all porn sites should be on one domain like .sex or .xxx and require proof of age such as a credit card. I know kids might still get around that, but at least anything showing up on other domains could be tracked and fined.

[lectrobyte]

1. > Any suggestions?

Supervise your children? Turn the computer off? Do you have electronic ear filters for those evildoers who will tell dirty jokes to your children on the playground at recess?

[sniffa]

2. i want more porn not Less

[Beetwasher]

11. Porn For Everyone!

Yay!

[sniffa]

15. porn for some.... miniature american fLags for others

[Ratty]

26. I'm voting for you!

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

3. I think communicating with your kids about it and having open

talks is much more preferable than infringing on adults. If your concerns were justified, we would have restricted violence on TV long ago.

It's the parent's job to teach their kids values..not the government's.

[Danieljay]

6. they don't allow cigarette adds, booze, or porn on TV

I agree its the parents role to teach values, I wont argue that. But imagine watching TV, changing the channel, and getting pop-up adds of people having sex, imagine going to your mail box and getting unwanted hard-core magazines. Imagine the phone ringing, you or your child picking it up, and a sex operator is at the other end talking trash. No parent would stand for that, that I know of. Much of this online trash is unsolicited.

I think we owe it to our kids to provide some kind of precautions. I'm a BIG proponant of civil rights, i'm just thinking there is something that would work that wouldn't infringe on the rights of adults.

[Occulus]

14. My experience has always been

that you really have to go out of your way to find porn online. But, that's only because I've been using the internet since before the web was the "next big thing", and I know how to avoid what I don't want to see.

Maybe we should start teaching our kids HOW to use engines like Google so they don't pop up porn.

Filtering software is a bad idea; all too often, they censor out innocuous words such as 'breast'... which include sites dealing with breast cancer, chicken breasts, "Tame the savage breast," and so on.

[AngryAmish]

30. Cigarette ads and booze ban is voluntary

It would be a 1st Amendment issue if gov't bans it from TV.

As for porn, the standard is now "indecent." Gov't can always limit 1st Amendment for time, method and place. I assume the holders of TV license agree not to be indecent.

Obscenity is never protected. But obscenity is hard to determine. I saw on Nightline a few months ago about a pornographer being sued for obscenity by the Feds. The guy -Rob Black- is a true scumbag. It was rumored he had a guy's thumb cut off. The porn is truly vile, too. (I like porn, but this was simulated rape and other violent porn. That is just gross.) Anyway, the old standard for determining obscenity was "community standards." Well, in modern day internet porn, what is the community? Bob Jones U? The red light district in Amsterdam?

There has to be a way to keep porn from kids. I just don't know how.

[Cerridwen]

4. Another suggestion

The folks over at the WWW Consortium http://www.w3.org



proposed sometime back that porn sites have a .xxx or .adult or .something-or-other-to-show-they're-porn URL/domain name. This "helps" the porn sites promote themselves to those who truly are interested and it helps those who choose not to view porn by allowing us to use email and web filters to filter out .whatever-they-use sites.

This article http://www.w3.org/2004/03/28-tld says it's not a great idea; I think it might be the start of a great idea.

[Danieljay]

8. I like the idea of a .xxx or .adult or .sex

You're right, it just might be a good start. Its not an easy fix and needs to be addressed on many levels including personal responsibility, good parenting, etc. Doing absolutely nothing I PERSONALLY think is irresponsible. This is a bigger problem than many realize. I read an article recently that said that doctors, psychologists and counselors are overwhelmed with patients having problems with sex addiction and families being torn apart by this. Thanks for your opinion.

[jukes]

22. sounds workable

& equitable to me.

[Mountainman]

5. Get the parents involved with the kids web surfing

You can block porn and porn related words. I suggest that porn sellers voluntarily use some kind of technology that helps with this, such as something on their site that identifies them as porn and that is used to block the site.

I do not believe in child proofing the world. That would put all things on a kids level.

IMHO, if a kid sees porn, I don't think he/she is ruined for life but it is not my place to tell parents how to raise their kids.

If there was something physically dangerous to their kids the parents would be involved enough to keep the kids protected from it. So to it is their job to get involved with their kids use of the internet.

If I had a kid I would monitor their computer usage.

[Q3JR4]

7. My two cents...

Don't set the computer up and then walk away leaving the child to do whatever he/she wants to without adult supervision. You'll just be setting yourself up.

Filters don't work that well anyway, blocking out things about gay, lesbians, and other information that may be important to someone who has questions about certain things. One can't always talk to one's parents about everything.

Even if you found a magic filter bullet that couldn't be deactivated by anyone, that filter would also have to be in place at chat rooms, on their emails, everything. Sex websites are always going to be with us. It's just a matter of the parent keeping an eye on what the child does, and answering questions when they come up.

Finally, there is software that you can purhcase (look up freeware too) that will do one (or both) of two things. It will either take captures of what is on the screen without anyone else knowing it, or it will keep a record of every key that has been pressed. This way if you child does get curious one day, you will know what they were looking at (and/or typing). It will allow you to nip the thing in the bud before they develope any kind of porn-type-addiction.

**********
On edit:
There shouldn't be any privacy concerns (you are the parent), but if it were me, I'd tell my child something that would lead him/her to believe that the computer and I communicate on a "special" level.

Then again, that might not work either depenind on how computer savvy your child is.

[Occulus]

17. It's soooo easy to set a BIOS password

on most machines... and most parents don't even know what one is.

Maybe parents should be required to have a computer license or something. Such would include mandatory training on how to set a BIOS password, how to clear it, how to clean spam and ads off the machine, how to format the hard disk and reinstall... in short, maybe parents need to be trained as computers techs to a degree.

(all the things I mentioned above are easily done for oneself. Even so, people in this country spen millions per year for others to do those same thing. Setting a BIOS passwrd takes all of thirty seconds or so.... yet a computer repair shop would charge you $50+ to do it! Most parents don't have the kind of cash on hand that all those steps above would cost to implement. The fact that they're so easy to do means nothing if they're scared to 'screw the machine up.')

[jackstraw45]

9. What could cause Clarence Thomas to break ranks with Scalia? His favorite:

Ah, the power of porn.

" Justices John Paul Stevens (news - web sites), David H. Souter, Clarence Thomas (news - web sites) and Ruth Bader Ginsburg (news - web sites) agreed with Kennedy."

Thomas with that group of left-leaning justices is just too ironic in the context of his well known use of porn and sexual harassment of women.

We also know from the Anita Hill fiasco that Thomas was a big fan of "Long Dong Silver."

[Danieljay]

10. lol..too funny, you might be on to something! n/t

[jackstraw45]

18. GOT to be it...find me ANY other case where Thomas has sided against

Scalia with those left-leaning justices.

Thomas is a JOKE.

Anita Hill was telling the truth and got slammed. I, for one, will never forget it.

[0007]

40. I followed the Anita Hill & Thomas thing very closely

Anita Hill got screwed by that that lying son-of-a-bitch. Yes, Thomas is a porn freak. And Thomas voted his conscious.

[NashVegas]

19. You Beat Me to It

I guess we can look forward to hearing about this in the monologues in late night tv.

[saigon68]

12. Dear Daniel

You could put your children in a RELIGIOUS boarding school where their every move is controlled.

OR You could also never allow computers, telephones, radios or TV in your house.

OR you could hire Minders 24/7 to watch your kids every move.

OR you could just be a parent and follow some of the other suggestions above.

Why do you want some 3rd party to raise your Child?

[Danieljay]

16. Dear Saigon

I don't have chldren and wouldn't send them to a religious boarding school if I did.

I think computers, telephones, radios, and TV's (although I don't watch television) are all necessary and can be used responsibly.

I can't afford minders and believe kids do have a right to their privacy.

I'm very much looking forward to being a parent and taking an active role in my childs life.

I never claimed in any way, shape, or form that I wanted a 3rd party to raise my child, if I had one.

This forum never ceases to amaze me. Knee jerk responses to serious issues are what I expect from the far right, not responsible, thinking adults.

I happen to agree with Hillary Clinton when it comes to raising children. It takes a village. If my child was doing something or involved with something that might bring them harm, I would hope a third party would at least provide some protection or at the least notify me that might child might be subjected to harm.

[NashVegas]

20. Communication is the Key

Parents have got to have those "talks" they dread.

The number of young people who fucked up their lives early on (whether due to active participation or simple happenstance) because their parents couldn't confront uncomfortable issues is beyond measure. No village can fix that. If anything, there are the village idiots to take advantage of it.

[Cerridwen]

28. And the village elders . . .

...could have stepped in to have the talk about uncomfortable issues the parents couldn't confront.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

33. Hey, you started this thread, remember? Did you expect everyone to....

...fall all over themselves to support everything you stated in your post? This is a message board, which means you WILL get a wide range of responses.

Deal with it.

[Danieljay]

42. point taken about wide range of responses..

and I'm willing to hear all of them, my point was that people tend to get a bit personal rather than dealing with the issues, thats all. I'm sure Saigon meant no harm, as do you.

[saigon68]

35. I didn't mean to be rude.

I have 6 children and step-children. They are all semi-normal. There were days I wanted to kill several at a time. I always thought it was my responsibility to raise them not the government.

I now know you are an intelligent compassionate person. I'm sorry if I caused you any perceived distress. But like someone else said when you ask a question you sometimes get a lot of strange answers.

[Danieljay]

43. I know...

you were simply making a point. I felt no distress. My distress relates to the current administration, not your response. I've been guilty of attacking the messenger myself...no offense taken. I'm actually pretty fond of most of the posts you put up. I myself may have taken it a little personally. No harm done!

I understand your point. ; )`

[emad]

13. See:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x653728

[mongo]

21. Why there is no such thing as sex addiction

From Dr Marty Klein's website.

http://www.sexed.org/archive/article08.html

Do people get obsessive/compulsive about sex? Sure sometimes. But we don't say a compulsive hand washer is addicted to sinks and try to restrict them.

As far as xxx domains - how do you regulate a worldwide entity?

[jukes]

24. Mongo

respectfully disagree. i've been a dependency counselor & expert witness in the field. a person can be psychologically addicted to sex, potato chips, religion: anything that breaks a dreary reality cycle.

& i think the sex industry wd willingly comply. most professionals are not predators, they are merely purveyers.




&, welcome, friend! haven't stumbled on any previous posts by you!

:hi:

[mongo]

29. If there is such a thing as sexual addition

why isn't it listed in the DSM IV?

ad·dic·tion (-dkshn)
n.

Habitual psychological and physiological dependence on a substance or practice beyond one's voluntary control.

Creating all these new "addictions" (sex,porn,Internet,food,shopping,etc)
is just a way for people to become a victim and not take personal responsibility for their actions. It's splitting behavior.

People can become compulsive about anything. There is nothing inherent in porn that makes people addicted to it. It is just an excuse when you want something that society frowns upon.

If I play golf 4 times a week, am I addicted to it? Probably not. But If I watch porn for the same amount of time/week, how may professionals would want me to get counseling for it?

I know I have some radical views about sex. I'm in a married monogamous relationship now, but I don't think either my wife or I would be that committed to each other or our marriage if we hadn't had a more wild life before we met. I wish our society had more outlets for our sexual needs, and allowed more exploration - in a controlled manner. A big Beltane orgy in every town would be a good start.

BTW - I don't watch all that much porn. Maybe 3 or 4 movies a month when my wife and I can watch together. Besides, most of it is crap.

[nolabels]

31. I worked for a guy that had one them hand washing addictions

Thank goodness it wasn't contagious, he had all kinds of sores and other things going on with them.



Antibacterial Insanity

In recent years, a huge number of products have become labeled as "antibacterial." It’s now possible to buy antibacterial soap, spray cleaners, hand sanitizers, toothpaste, body wash, and one company is even putting antibacterial agents on children’s toys!

The companies who make these products want you to think that your home is crawling with evil, sickness carrying GERMS that must be stopped. I know you are concerned about your family’s health and well-being, and so do the companies who make these products. Commercials for them manipulate your feelings of love and concern as a marketing ploy.

Many contain harsh chemicals that are bad for your skin, your eyes, your lungs, and some are even carcinogenic. Our bodies are designed to be able to fight off germs, but they can’t deal with some of these chemicals. There is even evidence that children growing up in too antiseptic of an environment develop immunological diseases because their bodies never learn to effectively deal with germs.

Not all bacteria cause diseases. There are also GOOD bacteria that are necessary for our health, but these products can't tell the difference and kill those too.
(snip)
http://www.practicalhippie.com/antibacterial.htm

That's kind of cute, a practical hippie :hippie:

[Danieljay]

32. the neurological pathways..

that develop and the resulting adrenaline rush and peptide release overtime affects the levels of dopamine and serotonin resulting in anxiety, depression, and OC disorders can;t be argued.

While I don't believe in the "disease" model of sex addiction, the problem IS real.

Your point is however and your opinion isn't without some merit. Thanks.

[donco6]

38. I totally agree with you Mongo

I think many of the things we call "addictions" are just compulsions that we actually *allow* to continue because we call them addictions! Relatively few things are truly physiologically addictive.

[AngryAmish]

45. Because DSM-IV and all the others are voted on

There is not general consensus that it is a disease.

[artr2]

23. What my wife & I did

was put a monitoring program on the kids computers. These programs show chat room dialog, URLs of sites visited and email read. For those of you who are concerned about the invasion of privacy, I really don't care. I will do what I feel necessary to keep my children safe. After they are 18 and I am no longer legally responsible for them, the program will come off

[jukes]

25. artr2

you're good parents. too much privacy for kids encourages bad choices. i made some very dangerous decisions when i was a kid because i wasn't very supervised.

[artr2]

27. I try not to be too snoopy

She is a good kid, with a plan for her life and I will do everything I can humanly do to help her reach her goals

[delhurgo]

34. This thread is just another example of the fact

that the democrat party is just as likely to censor as the republicans: sexual addiction (bunk), obscenity (there is no such re adults), "it takes a village" *vomit*,... What happened to the Dem party that believed strongly about 1st Amend issues? ...doesn't exist anymore. BTW, casual sex, teen preg, abortion, STD's,... the rates on all these are going DOWN. So what exactly is the prob with the net then?

This should have been an 9-0 decision, not 5-4 - thats the reason for concern. I wonder what Breyer's reasoning was on this? He was in the minority. I'm starting to be convinced that he was a bad choice.

[kiahzero]

36. "The Democrat Party," eh?

As for the Democratic Party being as likely to censor as the Republican Party, that's just bullshit. It's not Democrats generally pushing for things like the "Defense of Decency Act"... it's not Democrats attacking the National Endowment for the Arts for funding obscene artwork, etc.

[Forkboy]

41. I'm sure he just slipped up

;-)

[Danieljay]

44. what constitutes censorship and what constitutes prevention?

Its no wonder we get accused as the party with no morals. Is the democratic party just supposed to stand for "anything goes". What about gun control? Do we have a right to own automatic weapons? Bazookas? How bout shoulder fired missiles? I'm not trying to me a smart-ass...I'm just curious as to how far 1st amendment rights go? Is it ok to scream fire in a crowded theater? We have that right but isn't there a consequence? Do children have a first amendment right to view pictures of people having sex with animals? It just seems to me that censorship and prevention are two entirely different things. Help me out here...

I'm not asking for a ban, I'm just advocating some responsibility.

[donco6]

37. I think a lot of the rukus over porn is hysteria.

I don't believe in porn addiction - I think it's more a matter of someone needing to get a life. There's way more to do than sit home masturbating to naughty pictures. Jeez.

If porn wasn't so taboo it probably wouldn't be the multi-billion dollar industry that it is. Or at least, it wouldn't have to insinuate itself into our every waking moment through spam, pop-ups, banners, etc. If you needed a dildo or a mag or a sex show, you could hop down to the corner Beate Uhse and take care of yourself.

God I wish I lived in Deutschland. There is definitely something in the water here.

[sendero]

39. I think reasonable...

... measures should be taken to make porn access by minors as difficult as possible.

I don't believe in abridging the rights of adults at all to accomplish this.

The new spam laws are a step in the right direction. Now, spam porn mail (which I wish was just banned outright, but that will never happen) is at least tagged "sexually explicit" and could hence be easily filtered from a mailbox. I've noticed that most, but not all spammers are adhering to the new rules.

I have teenage sons and I've made it clear. I know how to look at what they have been looking at, and I periodically check. If I find inappropriate stuff, they will lose computer access for a month.

Believe me, they do not want to lose computer access for a day :)