For those concerned with Free Speech (or Porn), it is time to get active.

For those not in the know, the Bush administration has been gunning for the adult porn industry from before 911. That was originally going to be part of his package to the ultraright, and was to be announced on 916... 911 gave him something else to work on instead. He has slowly built his war machine back up to full speed and he just got a new weapon which will be devastating.Both parties have been guilty of conceding Free Speech to the rightwing. Under the motto of "protecting the children" adult content, and anyone making it, has been strapped with bizarre and pointless recordkeeping legislation. Well not totally pointless, it is designed to prevent people from communicating sexually by harassing them even when there is absolutely no chance of children being affected.USC 2257 was the first law regarding recordkeeping. Last year they added more, and it was just made active a day or so ago. Right now the ONLY people protected against it are those who are members of the Free Speech coalition, and that until a decision is rendered by the court.The effect of both 2257 and the new legislation is to make it near impossible for independent people to make their own websites, leaving only corporate porn. And of those that can remain the amount of information required is excessive and likely to deter people from participating in or making sexually graphic content. That is not to mention scaring producers away (both corporate and other) for the mere chance that a simple recordkeeping error will land them in jail for years.Remember this is NOT about protecting anyone, it is about sentencing people to jail for years for minor recordkeeping errors, if they decide to communicate in sexually graphic ways.Already sites are closing in the US, most likely never to be seen again... except possibly in Europe. Others are trying to make a stand so this is the moment to take your stand. If you have any interest in free sexual communication in the US, besides corporate porn heavily harassed by FBI to get them to close, you have to do something NOW. Here is a link to a detailed explanation of what the legislation and what has been happening.. and another, and another. Here is a link to what is going on right this minute.Please do read the above information so that you are informed on the subject, then use the following link to send a message to your congressmen to get them active on preventing this from moving forward. This link is to an online congressional directoryThose that don't like sexual content have already contacted their reps and are set to win a pretty big victory over free spreech. This will not be able to be taken back quickly once it is in motion.In keeping with the spirit of EvC, anyone who thinks these regulations are useful or necessary, or that sexual content should be purged using such backdoor methods are free to respond with their arguments.AbE: I forgot to mention labelling issues. You may also be thrown in jail for years for not having the correct font size for 2257 labels which will now have to be near dominant on anything with sexual content.For example something like Last Tango in Paris, or Realm of the Senses (two award winning movies with sexually graphic material) would have to have the 2257 notice on all materials be as large as whatever the second largest font size is. Thus the subtitle or the actors names, or producers. If not... years in jail.Also the labelling must include the actual physical address of the company or individuals making the sexual content. This has already been a contentious issue as for independents this means letting everyone in the world know in LARGE PRINT your real name and home address. The argument is that despite KNOWING this puts people's lives in danger, or livelihoods for those that are doing this on the side, the FBI and Attorney General say that risk is necessary to "save children".This message has been edited by holmes, 06-27-2005 08:45 AM

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Remember that this administration is supposed to be about FREEDOM! Oh yeah, but happens to favor the Taliban-style treatment for sexual expression.Honestly, when asked about danger posed to people like those girls who do webcam broadcasts from their home and are forced by law to tell potential attackers the exact address (including apartment number), and FBI agent told my lawyer in a disgusted tone:"Who cares about them?"Nice to have the FBI on the side of the people.Its especially ridiculous given the amount of concern regarding identity theft these days. Anyone producing sexual material must reveal enough info for someone to steal their credit identity to the entire world. But I guess all those in sexually explicit media deserve to have their money stolen... not to mention shot dead by religious fanatics.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

1) So if you don't like a certain type of speech it should be allowed to be extorted out of existence because it cannot be done directly through legal channels? (Remember this has nothing to do with content so I'm not sure what you are arguing except that extortion is okay)2) This legislation is more likely tp PROMOTE degradational porn. Corporate porn is what set the stereotypes. Almost all of the businesses attempting to reject that paradigm, as well as almost all women operated and run businesses are independents who will really take a hit on this.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

The ones that were libertines and partook of prostitutes, or the ones that had sex with underage slaves of different races? We've been awash in erotica (both pictorial and written) since before the 1760's.The founding fathers did tell us a thing or two, the first was that we have a freedom of speech that should not be abridged and not to have religious values enforced on others.I'm sad to see you come here and show your utter hypocrisy after demanding people not oppress others of different beliefs in the other thread.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Ignorance such as yours Tal.So you freely admit you recognize this as having nothing to do with children but a backdoor way to eat away at the first amendment, and you agree?Remember, enemies foreign and domestic. If you are for undermining the 1st amendment then you are indeed the traitor I have suspected.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

What is substantiated?1) That you are a simple-minded idealogue who draws unsubstantiated connections in order to legislate and enforced code of morality? I agree.2) That we need protection from such types? I agree.3) That porn creates serial killers? No. That has actually been proven completely false and if anything there is a positive correlation between religious zealotry or repressed sexual environments and serial killers.If you want to believe Bundy you should look into his religious upbringing as well as other famous serial killers the religious right doesn't want to discuss, the ones that carefully explain their Xian upbringing caused their problems.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I didn't know about that one, who was that?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

You're new so you may not know that my gf is, or I should say was at this point, in the porn biz. I don't want to get any more specific who we are or where you might have seen her... or perhaps us?But the fact is this really is about free speech and impacts more than porn. As a tool this can be used against other media, regulate it into submission. And the fact is that there are nonpornographic movies (movies that are not for just pleasure of watching sex), that contain material which is sexual and so get covered by this legislation.I already gave examples of this kind of movie such as Realm of the Senses. I will admit I am in a movie of that kind... nonporn but with some graphic sexual content... and now must fill out some very detailed records so the govt can keep tabs on me, despite clearly being beyond 17 years old.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

But can you blame him really? When the man's smoking major weed from his own plantation size stash, it's likely he may do some things he's not entirely responsible for.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I was actually expecting someone to try and toe the party line and explain why this kind of legislation is useful according to the reasons given for the legislation.It has surprised me to some extent to see people... except Tal, who I expect nothing better from at this point... take up my sarcastic request that they defend the attacks on sexual content using backdoor methods. Indeed that has been the only defense given so far.Are people really not concerned about setting a precedent of allowing the government to put in place regulations on legal speech to hinder people's ability to communicate?I'd like to give those who responded a second chance to look at their arguments again and this legislation, and address if this is really what they are for and defend the mechanism not the particular goal... though you can argue some content is worthy of that mechanism rather than others if you have some sort of criteria beyond "I like/I don't like".This is not supposed to be just a put down people that don't like porn thread, as there are ramifications beyond it.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

They are trying to shut down the industry as much as they can. This was one of their agreements/promises with the religious right.Prior to 911 they were preparing a major war against adult porn that was to be announced on 915 or 916. They were already preparing the nation for this by increased "soundbytes" from the president leading up to it. You will note that speeches from that time period were usually loaded with comments critical of people who think/say "if it feels good, do it".Ashcroft had been diverting resources away from counterterrorism toward porn and had several meetings with religious leaders to get ideas of how to stop the industry as well as assure them that this would be done.They did not believe that they could touch it directly as it would violate the first amendment. However they wanted to bring back the Reagan/Meese era tactics of harassing porn businesses into submission. This included all sorts of underhanded maneuvers including filing charges in multiple states and the federal govt for single products just to ensure economic ruin of the target.Janet Reno and Clinton ended such tactics officially, and Bush/Ashcroft put them back in play.As I have mentioned, this current piece of legislation is not going to affect corporate porn entities much if at all, though it may prevent some from deciding to ever start such corporations because it will be cost/labor prohibitive to start.What's worse is that it is likely to affect nonporn corporations from creating or importing movies with graphic sexual content. Few will want to deal with the resultant recordkeeping and labelling requirements.My guess is Bush probably does not care one way or the other about porn. Many leading Reps probably do not. And most are likely going to draw the line at bringing down the largest mainstream publications such as Playboy. The current Attorney General has already demonstrated a bit of a shift in policy by removing the drapes installed by Ashcroft over naked statues... so he may be a bit more lenient.But I really don't care if at least large corporate porn will survive. That is not the point at all. The point is that free speech is being eroded and wiping out independent voices or creative voices (nonporn) that use sexual content. This is a very dangerous precedent to set as a method to control speech.Imagine if we all get riled up about Islam and decide that anyone manufacturing or delivering Korans, or writing for Islamic literature in general could be a terrorist.Thus according to the logic of these regs, they should all be documented and the documents stored in well announced locations (perhaps right on the literature) so anyone can know exactly where to find the documents. The documents themselves being detailed biographical accounts including all writing (or other productions) one has done at any time in their life and all pen-names they may have used, or aliases used in other lines of work or association.My guess is everyone would spot right off the bat that that would be horrendous. In fact you could probably list just about anything and people would spot how wrong that is. But its sexual communication that is targeted and the fear mongering is about saving kids and suddenly it sounds good?Once the precedent this is okay is in place, there is no stopping the others from happening.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

You know, I think that was actually a better job than those who proposed this legislation? You are truly the Devil's advocate.I'll wait to see if any demons show up to accept your argument, before returning fire.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Hey you ARE the Devil's advocate!You have correctly detailed some of their concerns. It has already been announced that websites are going to be one the first and prime targets of this harassment... I mean legislation.And of course how they heck are they going to stop websites operated overseas from being used by Americans? Well one thing they will do of course is to prosecute any foreign national website selling memberships to US nationals. (I believe this is even stated in one of the Q&A documents I linked to).But that certainly can't prevent these things from occuring which is the goal, and of course that would entail stricter control of ISPs. Perhaps even monitoring of anyone that visits foreign sites regularly.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I hope so as that is the only dialogue in the movie Quest for Fire, as well as some amount of modern music.To be technical, and to be more accurate to the tone of enunciation I think you were driving at, I believe that is the language of love.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Always wanted to go, but never have. I suppose if you keep tabs on the indie cricuit there's a chance you've seen us somewhere (in pix, not person). That would include indie art movies as well. Exactly, the pendulum has got to be stopped and pushed back in the other direction. One refreshing thing about Europe is the lack of sensitivity to nudity and sexual imagery. It just plain exists... everywhere. And society is not falling apart.That Janet nipple thing, and govt reaction, makes Americans look so stupid it is almost unmatchable except with Islamic fundamentalist oppression of imagery in MidEast nations. God forbid kids see a breast, a nipple! The world will end!Wake up people.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)