News of the weird/funny/pointless - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to General Talk

News of the weird/funny/pointless

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: News of the weird/funny/pointless

Postby Mookie4ever » Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:16 am

It's certainly not black and white and when it is a question of where you draw a line it is a possibility that you may evenly divide people. Obscenity can no more be defined than can pornography for which the US supreme court said "I can't define it but I know it when I see it".

I find it odd that this should be attacked under an obscenity law when for me it clearly falls under a safety/hate crime issue. In Canada there is a limitation on all of the rights found in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms where it can be "demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society". In this manner free speech can be curtailed when it is dangerous eg yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre. Same with hate crimes and any freedom that infringes upon the freedoms or safety of others. If it is proportional to curtail your freedom then it may be done. It is clear in my mind that the safety of children is put at risk with this publication since the purpose is to encourage and facilitate the molestation of children. The harm caused by limiting free speech here is minimal when weighed agaisnt the risk. I don't see how you can argue for free speech here in the face of the potential harm.
Image
Mookie4ever
Head Moderator
Head Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterHockey ModBasketball ModFootball ModMatchup Meltdown ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 19543
(Past Year: 282)
Joined: 17 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Hakuna, Montana

Re: News of the weird/funny/pointless

Postby StlSluggers » Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:41 am

Mookie4ever wrote:It's certainly not black and white and when it is a question of where you draw a line it is a possibility that you may evenly divide people. Obscenity can no more be defined than can pornography for which the US supreme court said "I can't define it but I know it when I see it".

I find it odd that this should be attacked under an obscenity law when for me it clearly falls under a safety/hate crime issue. In Canada there is a limitation on all of the rights found in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms where it can be "demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society". In this manner free speech can be curtailed when it is dangerous eg yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre. Same with hate crimes and any freedom that infringes upon the freedoms or safety of others. If it is proportional to curtail your freedom then it may be done. It is clear in my mind that the safety of children is put at risk with this publication since the purpose is to encourage and facilitate the molestation of children. The harm caused by limiting free speech here is minimal when weighed agaisnt the risk. I don't see how you can argue for free speech here in the face of the potential harm.

Obviously, I haven't read the book, but the author claims that no act depicted in the book is illegal.

fwtw
StlSluggers
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 14716
(Past Year: 10)
Joined: 24 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Parking in the gov't bldg @ 7th and Pine. It's only $3.00 on game day!

Re: News of the weird/funny/pointless

Postby Madison » Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:09 am

Art Vandelay wrote:Breaking a law, then challenging the constitutionality of the law during your trial is one of the primary ways that unjust laws are changed or rescinded. How would you "challenge them in court" without being in court? I can't just go to the courthouse and sign up to challenge a law.


Lawyers challenge laws all the time without a single law ever being broken. Are you really that silly or just trying to make me laugh? :-b

Art Vandelay wrote:What does any of this have to do with the price of tea in China? Even if all of this is true, your "people used to be against child rape" (or whatever it was) argument was a ridiculous strawman.

And you can continue to say it isn't a free speech issue, but that won't change the fact that it is absolutely a free speech issue. Refusing to realize or admit that doesn't change it.


I made no such argument. This isn't the first time you've proven you have a hard time reading and comprehending, so I suggest you go take a class (or 10).

He got arrested for breaking a decency law, and the law has been posted. Harp on free speech all you want though, it's good for a laugh. :-D

whoa whoa whoa

now this guy's a child rapist? because that's a big leap from obscenity


Maybe he is, maybe he isn't, don't really care. He wrote the book in order to show how to do it and people bought the book in order to learn how to do it. They are all scum and I have no issue lumping them all in with child rapists.

Bam, sucka. Bad example to use.


Yep, bad example for me to use. Can't really blame myself though, people refuse to see the obvious so I have to throw them a bone here or there to try to clear it up, and once in awhile I toss out the wrong bone. Meh.

There's a lot going on there. First, as has been mentioned in this thread already, the issue of how the internet plays into the 'community standards' principle has never been ruled on at the highest level. The Supreme Court has admitted that they want to rule on it, and you'd have to think they are more interested in restricting it than expanding it (otherwise, they wouldn't voice an interest, because it's already pretty loose). Second, there's at least one Federal precedent where the Supreme Court indicated that they might not consider "sexually explicit material that appears to depict minors" to be obscene. Third, there's a state case where a law that matches this almost identically was declared unconstitutional; however, that was on the Miller standard and did not result in a ruling that the children depicted in sexual acts was, in and of itself, not obscene.

All of this basically goes back to my hypothesis laid out earlier: He's guilty at the local and maybe even state level, if they don't buy his defense that he was creating a work of 'literary value'. Assuming he takes this all the way through the appeals process, I see the Court probably ruling that Florida had no jurisdiction and restricting the bounds of the 'community standard' test much in the same way that sales taxes are limited on internet sales. Exactly how the redefine the scope of the jurisdiction, I can't even begin to guess. The big wild card is whether or not the Court would take that opportunity to rule on the constitutionality of depictions of children in sexual acts. They may ignore that completely if they have another agenda regarding a case like this.

So there you have it. That's it out of the nutshell. Knock yourselves out.


Good read. ;-D

You seem to think the Supreme Court is going to give more leeway though, where as I believe the Supreme Court is going to get more strict. Everything is getting more strict, so I don't think the Supreme Court is going to buck the trend by stretching the law to protect pedophiles and would be pedophiles.

As an aside, there is a big movement to start charging sales tax on all internet sales (since you brought that up specifically), the United States Postal Service has already passed new laws stating they will no longer deliver cigarettes in the mail, online poker has basically been shut down (hopefully will be regulated and legal soon though), illegal file sharing sites are being shut down, the new ruling this week on the "open" ;-7 internet (which I'd love to see a thread and opinions on by the way), etc, etc, etc. The internet is causing things to get more strict, not give more leeway. So I just don't see the Supreme Court ruling against the safety of children when they are already sticking their noses in doing everything they can to *cough* "protect" *cough* and restrict adults.
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Madison
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
ExecutiveEditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 53856
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Taking Souls...

Re: News of the weird/funny/pointless

Postby Neato Torpedo » Thu Dec 23, 2010 4:34 am

Related: we were just watching Manswers at a friend's house and there was a segment detailing the best way to dispose of a dead body. Mad, should they bring the producers up on charges, yes/no?
Image

Rocinante2: you know
Rocinante2: its easy to dismiss the orioles as a bad team
ofanrex: go on
Rocinante2: i'm done
Rocinante2: lmao

Play Brushback Baseball! (we need more people)
Neato Torpedo
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerWeb Supporter
Posts: 8618
Joined: 4 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: we don't burn gasoline, we burn our dreams

Re: News of the weird/funny/pointless

Postby wrveres » Thu Dec 23, 2010 5:13 am

Neato Torpedo wrote:Related: we were just watching Manswers at a friend's house and there was a segment detailing the best way to dispose of a dead body. Mad, should they bring the producers up on charges, yes/no?

for a comedy? are you being serious? are you really trying to compare the two?
25                "Love the Padres"
Rafael

Dodgers FAIL|Mets FAIL|Canada FAIL
wrveres
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterEagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe Musketeer
Posts: 31755
(Past Year: 746)
Joined: 2 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: News of the weird/funny/pointless

Postby Madison » Thu Dec 23, 2010 8:45 am

wrveres wrote:for a comedy? are you being serious? are you really trying to compare the two?


You really expected someone to be able to make a case for the guy? All they've got is stuff like this. :-b
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Madison
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
ExecutiveEditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 53856
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Taking Souls...

Re: News of the weird/funny/pointless

Postby Art Vandelay » Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:39 am

Madison wrote:
Art Vandelay wrote:Breaking a law, then challenging the constitutionality of the law during your trial is one of the primary ways that unjust laws are changed or rescinded. How would you "challenge them in court" without being in court? I can't just go to the courthouse and sign up to challenge a law.


Lawyers challenge laws all the time without a single law ever being broken. Are you really that silly or just trying to make me laugh? :-b

And people challenge laws all the time after they've been arrested for breaking them. You can't possibly deny this. I didn't say it's the only way, I said it's one of the primary ways.

Madison wrote:
Art Vandelay wrote:What does any of this have to do with the price of tea in China? Even if all of this is true, your "people used to be against child rape" (or whatever it was) argument was a ridiculous strawman.

I made no such argument. This isn't the first time you've proven you have a hard time reading and comprehending, so I suggest you go take a class (or 10).

If you "made no such argument," what did you mean by:
Madison wrote:the entire country has agreed that raping a child is wrong (until now of course).

Madison wrote:He got arrested for breaking a decency law, and the law has been posted. Harp on free speech all you want though, it's good for a laugh. :-D

You simply can't separate decency laws from freedom of speech. Any time a government agent or entity tries to stifle or censor someone's expression, it's a freedom of speech issue. Not all speech is protected, some of us think this guy's book should be, others think it shouldn't, but to continue to deny that it is a freedom of speech issue makes you look absurd.
Image
Art Vandelay
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy ExpertPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5265
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: News of the weird/funny/pointless

Postby Madison » Thu Dec 23, 2010 11:46 am

Art Vandelay wrote:And people challenge laws all the time after they've been arrested for breaking them. You can't possibly deny this. I didn't say it's the only way, I said it's one of the primary ways.


Sure they do, I don't disagree, I'm just saying it's stupid to break a law in order to challenge it. There are more adult ways of challenging the law.

If you "made no such argument," what did you mean by:
Madison wrote:the entire country has agreed that raping a child is wrong (until now of course).


I meant exactly what I said, you don't have to figure out what I "mean" when I say something. That's what screws stuff up Art. Read what I say, not what you think I "mean" by it.

For the record, what you quoted wasn't an argument, just an observation.

You simply can't separate decency laws from freedom of speech. Any time a government agent or entity tries to stifle or censor someone's expression, it's a freedom of speech issue. Not all speech is protected, some of us think this guy's book should be, others think it shouldn't, but to continue to deny that it is a freedom of speech issue makes you look absurd.


Bzzzt. Wrong. Not everything in this world is a free speech issue, as much as you may wish it was (or mistakenly believe it is).

And if you think I look absurd (nice to see you finally spelling that word correctly ;-D ), then tell me how bad you must look when your position is worse than mine. :-D
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Madison
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
ExecutiveEditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 53856
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Taking Souls...

Re: News of the weird/funny/pointless

Postby wrveres » Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:12 pm

Madison wrote:
wrveres wrote:for a comedy? are you being serious? are you really trying to compare the two?


You really expected someone to be able to make a case for the guy? All they've got is stuff like this. :-b


i understand their point of view, and agree with it to a point. Im all for free speech. But there are certain things in this world you can't do. You cant say bomb on an airplane, you'll get arrested. You can't threaten the president, you'll get arrested.

I am pro adding, you can't write a book about slipping things into little boy butt. its so over the line that i'd support a constitutional amendment.

At the minimum, the guy needs mental help. Hopefully he gets that help now.
25                "Love the Padres"
Rafael

Dodgers FAIL|Mets FAIL|Canada FAIL
wrveres
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterEagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe Musketeer
Posts: 31755
(Past Year: 746)
Joined: 2 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: News of the weird/funny/pointless

Postby Art Vandelay » Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:27 pm

Madison wrote:Sure they do, I don't disagree, I'm just saying it's stupid to break a law in order to challenge it. There are more adult ways of challenging the law.

I don't believe he broke the law in order to change it. I think he got arrested for breaking a law that shouldn't exist and I hope his case results in it getting changed.

Madison wrote:I meant exactly what I said, you don't have to figure out what I "mean" when I say something. That's what screws stuff up Art. Read what I say, not what you think I "mean" by it.

I wasn't trying to figure out what you meant, I was responding to exactly what you said, which was a ridiculous strawman. Nobody was saying anything in support of child rape, yet you brought it up as if you were making some grand point and showing a flaw in what the rest of us were saying. I didn't ask what you meant until you told me you didn't say anything like that, which made me think maybe I was confused. Good to know I wasn't, and that you just cannot recognize a strawman when it's your own.


Madison wrote:
Art Vandelay wrote:You simply can't separate decency laws from freedom of speech. Any time a government agent or entity tries to stifle or censor someone's expression, it's a freedom of speech issue. Not all speech is protected, some of us think this guy's book should be, others think it shouldn't, but to continue to deny that it is a freedom of speech issue makes you look absurd.


Bzzzt. Wrong. Not everything in this world is a free speech issue, as much as you may wish it was (or mistakenly believe it is).

Of course not everything in the world is, but this case definitely is. You cannot possibly be any more wrong about this particular subject. This is absolutely a free speech issue. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it and no way around it. Continuing to deny it doesn't make you right, it just makes you wrong more often. Even the people that essentially agree with you in this thread recognize this as a free speech issue, but feel that this particular speech shouldn't be protected.

[quote="Madison"nice to see you finally spelling that word correctly ;-D[/quote]
Ha! I'd probably still be spelling it wrong if you hadn't pointed it out to me before.

And with that, I must bid this thread adieu. I hope everyone has a good Christmas!
Image
Art Vandelay
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy ExpertPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5265
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to General Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Friday, Aug. 1
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Seattle at Baltimore
(7:05 pm)
Texas at Cleveland
(7:05 pm)
Philadelphia at Washington
(7:05 pm)
Colorado at Detroit
(7:08 pm)
LA Angels at Tampa Bay
(7:10 pm)
indoors
San Francisco at NY Mets
(7:10 pm)
Cincinnati at Miami
(7:10 pm)
indoors
NY Yankees at Boston
(7:10 pm)
Minnesota at Chi White Sox
(8:10 pm)
Toronto at Houston
(8:10 pm)
Milwaukee at St. Louis
(8:15 pm)
Kansas City at Oakland
(9:35 pm)
Pittsburgh at Arizona
(9:40 pm)
Chi Cubs at LA Dodgers
(10:10 pm)
Atlanta at San Diego
(10:10 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact