No, what's absurd is setting arbitrary standards for an industry based on taste.


Oh, but we will try, won't we?

Which I completely agree with. So now your next project is to explain to me how this:Is not "arbitrary standards for an industry based on taste"

Oh, you mean "my arbitrary standards based on what I, The Enlightened One, have deemed is ok. Anything more conservative than what I think, is, of course, unenlightened and ridiculous"......

Hello, Pot? This is kettle calling..... Guess what. You're black!

My baselines are merely trying to make 'sense' of what 'community standards' should be, if there are to be standards at all. And, of course, if we agree that the concept of 'community standards' is ridiculous, then we don't have a problem, do we?

I retract my former baselines for the illegality of porn, if only for Philbiker's sake. If he can't stand someone else's opinion of 'how it should be', then he should not be made to hear it. I guess that makes two of us.

You seem to have completely missed the point........... Which is...........

The delineation of what is and what is not allowable is not as clear cut and black and white as you seem to think. Opinions that differ with yours deserve the same respect you demand of your own opinions. This is the way democracy works. The best and only way to decide what is and what is not decent is by challenging "community standards" on a case by case basis in court.

Which is exactly what is happening here. Watch the whole documentary that I linked to, not just some parts of it. It's the best coverage of the issue that I've ever seen.

You seem to be advocating an authoritarian "this is allowed/this is not" system, with your definitions of what should be and what should not be allowed as the only possible allowable condition. This would have been nice in the former USSR or Nazi Germany or someplace, and I'm sure the religious right would like to be the arbiters of taste as well, but that's not the way it works here in the USA.

I agree with your statement that This is not what is happening with this FBI Squad at all. There's nothing arbitrary going on here.We certainly don't agree at all on that. I personally don't need or want hardcore porn in massive billboards on the highway. That's a community standard. If someone were to post something like an explicit "vivid" ad on a billboard next to a day care center there's no law specifically against that, they'd have to be brought to court for "violating community standards". I personally think that's a better system than having a law on the books that defines exactly where and when certain things are appropriate. Stuff like the MPAA ratings system are not codified in law, they're voluntary. I like that better than what you seem to be proposing.

To go back to the documentary for a moment:
Twelve men & women sitting on a jury at 10:00 a.m. in a formal courtroom are going to decide what constitutes a violation of community standards? I don't feel comfortable saying that a fetish porn video is 'A-OK' in a courtroom full of my community brethren, but I might be inclined toward watching that same video one night, given the right circumstances.
See any problems here?

And please don't be so naive as to think that the 'arbiters of taste' aren't being heavily influenced by the neocon/religious right agenda. If they can make headway into classification of types of porn as being 'illegal', they will not stop until *all* porn is illegal. Why weren't we focusing on this during the Clinton years?



LMAO! No, of course not. Eight FBI suits sitting in D.C. certainly seem to represent all the diversity of opinion in America...



If there aren't laws against it, then obviously billboard companies have felt the pressure against putting it up in the first place. That's called the free market at work. I agree, it's completely voluntary, let it be.



Stuff like a crack-FBI squad prosecuting purveyors of porn isn't voluntary at all. The fact that there aren't codified laws against this or that only increases the ambiguity with which prosecutions can be handed out.

Four fingers - good. Five fingers - bad?

I see that you're telling me you're a hypocrite. No problems other than I don't want you on any juries now.Again, your same mantra "my opinions are right and people who don't agree with me are wrong". Thanks for the self-righteous condescension. The "arbiters of taste" in the current system are the members of the juries who see the cases. The FBI team only works with the attorney general to decide what to bring to court.That's a question for Janet Reno.According to.... what exactly? I have absolutely no idea where you're going here or what you're even complaining about.The laws are against "violating community standards". If the porn company put up an explicit billboard next to a day care center as in my ridiculous example, they'd get fined and forced to take down the board for breaking the law against violating the community standards assuming someone like the FBI Porn Squad convinced a DA to bring a case to court. These kinds of laws are specifically vague for many reasons, most importantly that community standards change. The community standards are decided by a jury. It sounds to me like you would like a totalitarian law that removes juries and places arbitrary contraints on content that are decided by you.So again what do you want here? A massively complex codified law for what is allowed and what is not, based on your personal opinions? That's what it appears that you are advocating. What about people who don't agree with your opinions?

Funny thing. Sounds like what you're advocating too. Violate one's opinion 'for the benefit of all'.

I don't want the 'community' deciding what my opinions should be, thanks.

Peculiar thing - the only time I advocate the workings of the free market as superior, I get labeled as a totalitarian Nazi - in textbook Godwin fashion, to boot.

I think you're deliberately just ignoring the entire issue at this point.....

Sounds like now you're advocating that the most deplorable stuff on film should be allowed no problem..... the "community" is who has decided that kiddie porn is wrong. Guess we're not allowed to draw the line anywhere now...

I'm advocating that we don't codify anything beyond what's already on the books. I say let the courts and juries decide what the standards should be instead of the lawmakers. The best way to test the community standards is to bring the really deplorable stuff to court and see if it flies. Apparently I give juries much more respect than you do. It's up to public attourneys to decide what to bring to court, if anything, for violating community standards. Whether they lose or win will set precedents which the adult industry can use as a guideline. As it is now they have nothing but "anything goes" to decide on since there hasn't been any cases in so long.

I personally see no problem with this FBI Effort, it's fine by me, and I don't feel that my personal freedom is threatened by it at all, and my personal opinions on porn are irrelevant to my opinion on this specific matter.

Actually, you're wrong. If constitutional and state rights to consent are being violated, then the offenders would be prosecuted - but not under obscenity laws. They would be prosecuted under regular criminal law.

There is a 'line', and it's drawn at the constitution.
You're not going to nail me on the cross of moral relativism here.

What about straight, one-on-one gay porn? Even softcore. Do you think that would fly in most communities in Amerika? Do you think Plano, Texas or Mesa, Arizona cares to have this stuff around? Do you think that the 'community' is objective enough not to bring its religious/moral bias into their decision to ban the stuff? I'm sorry, but I don't have that much faith in any 'community'.

Think the FBI team will convince an public attourney to bring a case against that to court? I don't. I guess the difference here is that you just have some need to whine and feel repressed and morally superior and I am willing to just let our democracy work.

Since you're so much smarter than everyone else you've decided you had better protect them from themselves. I'll bet you call them "sheep" too right?

Or maybe you just don't know the difference between a mountain and a molehill.....

Two prudes voted that all porn should be banned...