Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 31-Mar-96 Witch Hunts by Bruce Zambini@rwd.gouche
effective, critical technique. (This is, in fact, one reading of De Sade's "pornography" -- an interesting counterexample to what was trumpeted on _Both_ sides of the recent Firing Line debate: that pornography or obscenity is, whether or not protected, devoid of any intellectual content.)
That's not entirely true. The ACLU's position, as provided by Ira Glasser at the debate, is that pornography is not a legal term d'art, that it is presumptively protected by the First Amendment, and furthermore that sexually explicit images are not necessarily harmful to minors. The difference between "porn" and "obscenity" is intellectual content. -Declan (Not speaking for the ACLU)