Archive for the ‘free speech’ Category

(Update 2x) Judge Presiding Over Pr0n Trial Had His Own Site With…Pr0n — and that Honestly is Too Bad

Wednesday, June 11th, 2008

Per the LAT, the California trial of an alleged pornographer that I wrote about here is currently being presided over by the well-respected 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, which I had thought a good thing. But it turns out, Kozinski himself maintained a personal web site that was recently discovered to partially include depictions of the same sorts of bestiality and defecatory practices as do the films the defendant is on trial for in Kozinski’s courtroom (h/t Mike in comments below). Kozinski: (more…)

Posted in Uncategorized, free speech, humor | 7 Comments »

Do Dead Iraqis Have “Literary, Scientific or Artistic Value?”

Monday, June 9th, 2008

In 2005, the Christian right demanded that the Bush Administration crack down on the obscene death and maiming occurring in Iraq adult pr0n. And so it is according to the LAT, that a jury has been empanelled in a California federal district court to watch six hours of “fetish pornography” that includes acts of defecation, as well as man and/or woman on dog/snake/turtle etc. The producer of the films, Ira Isaacs, insists that he is an artist and his films works of art. But he concedes: (more…)

Posted in Behind bars, free speech, religion in politics, your friend the state | 3 Comments »

Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate Bob Barr: Or, an Authoritarian By Any Other Name…

Friday, June 6th, 2008

Do not vote for Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr — if you are a libertarian, you’d have to be schizophrenic to do so. Do not vote for him even if you decide Obama can’t win, or even if for some unfathomable reason are in the tank for McCain and decide he cannot prevail. For if there is one defining attribute of libertarians of any stripe, it is opposition to drug prohibition. Yet, as Radley Balko observed in 2005, Barr has advocated that: (more…)

Posted in Campaigns, Election '08, free speech, libertarianism, the drug "war" | 39 Comments »

Confused “Neo-libertarian” Site Gets Free Speech, Well, Confused

Saturday, May 24th, 2008

Poor Karl at the “neo-libertarian” blog Protein Wisdom waxes indignant — nay, verily scandalized — about Glenn Greenwald’s superb job documenting the many millions of dollars flowing from telecoms to lobby (and even personally benefit) members of both parties in the U.S. Congress. Greenwald addresses the (sarcasm alert!) coincidental relationship between said expenditures on the one hand, and on the other, a congresscritter’s support for telecom amnesty in the matter of the telecoms’ violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by joining with BushCo to secretly spy on Americans’ telephone and email communications without warrants.

(more…)

Posted in Glenn Greenwald, Republicans, free speech, neoconservatives, vulgar libertarianism | 21 Comments »

Scientology Is a Truly Bad “Cult,” But There are Worse Things — Like Proscribing Free Speech

Tuesday, May 20th, 2008

No doubt my post expressing wariness of the treatment of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints compound in Texas — where over 400 children were removed from their families — gave insight into my view that ill-informed, uncritical hatred of any new religion dismissed as a “cult” is dangerous. And can result in illiberal state action.

(more…)

Posted in "cults", abuse of power, free speech | 4 Comments »

Feds watch huge amounts of fetish porn to protect U.S. citizens from graphic depictions of sex

Saturday, May 3rd, 2008

Since the early 1990s I have appreciated the (often hilarious) way Susie Bright makes fun of those prosecutors who focus their energy on porn. The newest trend in anti-pornography crusades suggests a breakthrough (so says Susie) in the way anti-pornographers view female orgasm: (more…)

Posted in free speech, sex work | 2 Comments »

No chance of dealing with the problem so you might as well outlaw conversation about it (anorexia)

Wednesday, April 16th, 2008

France is likely to enact a law to ban websites that encourage anorexia. If I was feeling cynical, I might suggest that there is a kind of cowardice in banning the sites, rather than addressing the social forces that might cause women to starve themselves to death. The law would be defensible in a “You can’t shout ‘fire’ in a crowded theater” kind of way if it could be shown that banning these sites would actually save a life somewhere. As it stands, I have trouble believing this law will actually save lives. Also, how in the world can such a law be enforced? If a law such as this was passed in America, it would mean that all the pro-ana groups on MySpace and Facebook would be illegal. Who would be responsible for enforcement, the government or MySpace and Facebook? Would usernames such as “Ana is my sister” and “I love Ana” become illegal? Such a law would mean that the folks who started Ana Friends would face criminal charges. It would also raise tricky questions about who holds the responsibilty for the forums that users start on big websites. For instance, who would face criminal sanctions for the pro-anorexia forum on LiveJournal, LiveJournal, or the woman who started the forum?

(more…)

Posted in anorexia, feminism, france, free speech | 10 Comments »