I do not believe the first amendment covers pornography. It should be illegal

I do not believe the first amendment covers pornography. It should be illegal.

Other urls found in this thread:

web.archive.org/web/20140527124840/http://72.52.208.92/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/hu.gh_hefner_supplement.htm
waterfordwhispersnews.com/2017/09/28/were-finally-free-dozens-of-women-released-from-california-mansion/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

then how would your mom make a living?

>already decided by scotus
kys, faggot

It is, except in two states.

It's fine if you're gay, but please keep it to yourself

>live to be 91
>endless sex and fame

nice

Yeah, but he's in Hell now.

wow you sure showed him

>muh SCOTUS
Same fags who said gay marriage was legal?
By the way, the SCOTUS hitherto what you mentioned had always previously maintained that obscenity was NOT covered under the first amendment.
That is more so a fitting picture for a contradictory legalist retard like yourself than OP who by the way is 100% right.

>impotent
>extremely emasculated
>low quality sperm produced an ugly stupid son
>contribute only degeneracy and perversions to society and stated the decline.

>I do not believe (blah blah blah)
The founding fathers believed you should kill yourself.

Heaven is probably gay as fuck anyway

Yeah but prohibition has been historically ineffective so I don't know how you think that'll solve anything

perhaps you're right

I highly doubt Washington and Adams were in favor of publishing obscenity.

based trick man in da house

>I do not believe.....

so?

I highly doubt they wanted to make it illegal, otherwise they would have added that little bit.
I am not even entirely against the idea, I just fucking despise faggots like you who can read a black on white statement protecting freedom of expression and conclude "yeah, except for that part because I don't like it".

sorry
cant be
constitution comes first
which rendered those laws invalid upon their passing

boobs are art, not porn faggot

...

>hell

>now

nope
read your scriptures
gehenna does not yet exist
it comes right at the end of armageddon, which comes right after the millennium

>I do not believe the first amendment covers pornography

Believe in one hand and shit in the other, let me know which one fills up first.

You don't get to pick and choose when your constitution applies, that's how the enemy thinks.

>Fugh Hefner
he did live his how he wanted and playboy was really about him - mancave, bitches etc

The American constitution makes plenty of arbitrary restrictions on the 1st Amendment, I don't see how a restriction on pornography would be any different.

The case for pornography could be argued either way by a court, it is a subjective issue as with all the other restrictions on free speech.

It didn't used to be protected until two land mark cases, both with jew plaintiffs. The first was roth v US in 1957, the second was miller v CA in 1973.

>Under the common law rule that prevailed before Roth, articulated most famously in the 1868 English case Regina v. Hicklin, any material that tended to "deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences" was deemed "obscene" and could be banned on that basis.

>Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court wherein the court redefined its definition of obscenity from that of “utterly without socially redeeming value” to that which lacks "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

>I do not believe the first amendment covers pornography. It should be illegal.

This is a not unreasonable point.

The Supreme Court basically pulled the doctrine out of their collective ass. The text of the First Amendment does not remotely touch on pornography; one must engage in a very strained and tortured analysis to have it reach such matter.

>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

In Rosen v. United States (1896), the Supreme Court adopted the same obscenity standard as had been articulated in a famous British case, Regina v. Hicklin (1868), which defined material as obscene if it tended "to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences, and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall."

The Court ruled in Roth v. United States (1957) that the Hicklin test was inappropriate.

Instead, the Roth test for obscenity was "whether to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest."

right on. morals first.

>being this degenerate

correct

Only gays like porn

>...or of the press...

The Court could have easily taken the position that the First Amendment was no more intended to protect the ability to freely publish pornography than it was intended to protect the ability to freely publish defamation (the Court has always held that defamation is outside the scope of First Amendment protection).

This. Porn should honestly be banned. I hate it I think anything designed to promote sexuality should be banned anyting

Why can't porn be art? Why can't art be porn?

You should probably fix your horrendous sentence structure there before you even attempt to ban anything you fucking puritan

nope

>This is a not unreasonable point.

ah, so if i throw a tantrum then i can censor anything i want

imbecile

At least I'm not a degenerate. I thiNK you are just a degenerate sex driven freak

thats not how free speech works

Muh Freeze peach

Well, if the Supreme Court held that pornography was *not* protected by the First Amendment, it wouldn't follow from that that pornography was necessarily banned.

State and federal law would have evolved to regulate it. And nothing of value would have been lost; and much of value in our culture that has been lost would have been preserved.

"shameless purveyor of sexual degeneracy"

>believes in religion

This honestly

Pornography will never be banned, as it's a really handy tool for jewish mindcontrol.
Makes men waek-willed and much easier to control.

You're right. My ancestors didn't found this country and fight its wars so that kikes could corrupt young girls and make men weak. They created the First Amendment so that white men of good character could freely debate, not so that Jews could destroy civilization.

Libertarians just don't get this.

I'm anti sex too but I mean it's not even a conspiracy. It's just degeneracy

Funny thing is now you have pornography and no free speech. Ha, ha, ha.

Your feelings end where my rights begin

>implying your made up heaven where you hug a Jewish man and tell him about all the kids who were mean to you could possibly have been as good as his life here

Stay mad, faggot.

It doesn't matter what you belive. You're wrong, and we have the legal documents to prove it.

Obscene content is not obscene speech
Subjecting people to obscenity without their own seeking it out is obcene.

yeah good thing you don't make the laws around here then

chekd an kekd

Explain why pornography is such a danger to society that it warrants it being illegal.

>durrr
>/pol is catholic board!!!!!
>constantly posts porn
>fawns over traps
>endlessly jerks off

OK, but in 1966, Hefner published an interview with George Lincoln Rockwell when no one else would touch him. Sometimes you have to take the good with the bad.

Why should anyone be imprisoned for what their eyes have gazed upon?

Another dead kike. Good.

web.archive.org/web/20140527124840/http://72.52.208.92/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/hu.gh_hefner_supplement.htm

he scrubbed his jewish history

kill yourself, soccer mom

It'll just create a black market.

People are animals and that won't change anytime soon.

:/

Fuck this stupid planet.

I do not believe the first amendment covers protest . It should be illegal .

They don't have to ban it, they can simply order ISP's to block porn by default requiring someone to ask for it to be unblocked to access it like they do in israel.

Porn is degenerate, it promotes promiscuity and other sexual perversions which lead to a dysfunctional society and a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah.

It covers everyone's free expressions... but not porn because I don't like that.

Perhaps a particular law is inefficient as a deterrent. Who cares? The purpose of the law is not solely as a deterrent. Maybe, if porn was illegal, people would still seek it out. But then you would arrest them and punish them. It's almost as if you think if you have laws you don't need cops or courts to enforce them.

waterfordwhispersnews.com/2017/09/28/were-finally-free-dozens-of-women-released-from-california-mansion/
my God you're right! Heff was a degenerate old man after all.

Pornographic counts as art, which is protected by free speech

...

...

checked

Why do people have such a weak position on human autonomy as to try to ban porn? People still don't seem susceptible to negative influences of that sort. The only protections that really seem necessary are for children. It just projects this grand weakness to target porn.

...

>I do not believe the first amendment covers pornography. It should be illegal.
The law keeps it hidden, and unavailable for a minor. You have the choice to not indulge in it. You have the choice to say no. Tell others the same. It blows their mind when they figure it out.

I think at the very least you should be required to enter a credit card number to access a porn website, even if it's a free website. Kids are watching porn when they're 9 these days. It has to stop.

Disgusting.
Bet there's a spic hiding behind that flag

But calling to exterminate huge groups of people should be legal?

lol. Say goodbye to nice cunts like these. White men are too stupid, too cowardly, and too greedy to defend the white race, so these are going BYE BYE....THe only trim left by 2100 will be disgusting brown roasties.

first post best post

those glasses
>and nothing of value was lost

Nobody cares what you think, pussy.

>I do not believe

Nobody cares what you do or don't believe.

At least you can see what freedom of expression can mean to people. I like that picture, because it shows exactly what this thread is about.