HomeArchive 1Archive 2ACLU ExposedGuest Commentary Web News LinksContact

Our Supreme Court, once again, gives another wink & nod to the filthy smut peddlers. Once again, the Supreme Court shows contempt for the American family and values.

Have you ever wondered why the internet is so polluted with pornography?

Well, wonder no more. The Supreme Court just reminded us why.

It blocks every attempt by Congress to regulate the pornographers, the smut peddlers at large.

From its ivory tower thrones, the Court props open the floodgates for filthy smut of any kind and graphic sex.
Over the past five years, it has repeatedly found new constitutional rights for vulgarity, most recently invalidating the Child Online Protection Act (COPA).

This latest judicial outrage happened on the final day of the Supreme Court term, after which the justices headed cowardly out for a long summer break.

Did you wipe the spittle from your face America?

Lacking teenaged children of their own, these justices closed their eyes to electronic obscenity polluting our children's minds.

For decades, pornographers have enjoyed better treatment by our courts than any other industry. The justices have constitutionally protected obscenity in libraries, over cable television, and now unlimited internet pornography of the worse kind.

This flood of pornography started with the Warren Court when it handed down 34 decisions between 1966 and 1970 in favor of the smut peddlers.

In mostly one-sentence decisions that were issued anonymously (the justices were too cowardly to sign them), the Court overturned every attempt by communities to maintain standards of decency.

The judges' obsession with smut is astounding. Even though five Supreme Court justices were appointed by Presidents Reagan and the first Bush, graphic sex wins judicial protection in essentially every case.

Woe to those who transgress an obscure environmental law, or say a prayer before a football game.

These pornography predators can do no wrong in the eyes of our top justices. The most explicit sex can be piped into our home computers and the Supreme Court prevents our democratically elected officials from doing anything about it. They continue to side with the filth of the nation.

These predators want the minds of your children and these judges know it. That makes you feel better now doesn't it!

COPA was enacted by Congress in response to the Court's invalidation of the predecessor law, the Communications Decency Act of 1996. But decency lost again when six justices knocked out COPA in Ashcroft v. ACLU.

COPA was badly needed, as filth plagues the internet, incites sex crimes, and entraps children. COPA banned the posting for "commercial purposes" on the World Wide Web of material that is "patently offensive" in a sexual manner unless the poster takes reasonable steps to restrict access by minors.

You don't need to look very far to find a tragic crime traceable to the internet. In New Jersey in 1997, 15-year-old Sam Manzie, who had fallen prey to homosexual conduct prompted by the internet, sexually assaulted and murdered 11-year-old Eddie Werner, who was selling candy door-to-door.

COPA did not censor a single word or picture. Instead, it merely required the purveyors of sex-for-profit perverted pornography to screen their websites from minors, which can be done by credit card or other verification.

But, as I said earlier, minors (children) are an intended audience for the highly profitable sex industry. Impressionable teenagers are most easily persuaded to continue their "appetency sexual hungers" of perversion well into their adulthood (which means continued profit for these smut peddlers) as these justice's seem to have done.

Justice Kennedy declared it unconstitutional for Congress to stop porn filth flowing to teens, shifting the burden to families to screen out the graphic sex rather than imposing the cost on the companies profiting from the filth.

Gee, let's steal more money from the pockets of American families. Make them pay for the decency they so desire.

His reasoning is as absurd as telling a family just to pull down its window shades if it doesn't want to see people exposing themselves outside.

The Supreme Court insisted that individual internet users should buy filters to "try" to block the vulgarity.

Should those who do not like air pollution be told to buy air masks?

In a prior pro-porn decision, Kennedy cited Hollywood morals as a guide for America. Obscenity is wrapped in the First Amendment, not your rights to decency and morality according to Justice Kennedy.

He must be kin to Ted Kennedy!

The Supreme Court protects pornography in books, movies, cable television, and the internet, real or simulated, against all citizens' clean-up efforts. The Court no longer weighs a controversy, but being dominated by media-driven supremacists, they continue to force us down into a moral sewer.

The solution to these ills foisted on us by judicial supremacists is for Congress to exercise its constitutional powers to remove jurisdiction from the federal courts over pornography. The Court has abused its power, and it's Congress's duty to end the judicial abuse.

Our Constitution is being used against the good in America. I guess to insure the protection of the good in America, you have to protect the bad right along with it...Right? The crux of the matter is, the protection of the bad overrides the protection of the good it seems.