-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Tim May wrote:

What I said was that the judge(s) in the Paladin case had committed a capital crime. Saying, for example, that OJ committed a capital crime is not uncommon, so why should judges be exempt from similar opinions?

Laws prohibiting speech are notoriously difficult to define and to enforce impartially. They quickly evolve into a blank check for the authorities. (Note that even if these laws didn't have this property, Monty Cantsin would oppose them.) OJ is fair game because the authorities would like to see him in prison. The judge is not fair game because he is a judge and this is a list with a bad attitude. The wonderful thing about language is that it is infinitely malleable. You could write a play in which a prominent character was a bear. Sounds harmless, right? In 1969 in Czechoslovakia, this is how people wrote unfriendly plays about the Russians. Child porn is notoriously difficult to define. A few years ago there was a case in which a convicted child pornographer or molester (my memory fails) was paroled.(1.) One of the conditions was that he was not to have any child pornography. Later, he was found with a videotape of children in bathing suits and his parole was revoked. The children were not involved with any sexual acts, however, the judge decided that the motion of the camera was overly suggestive. A few years ago I saw an ad for soap in which cute little girls were cast in the roles that lovely adult women usually play. To most people, this was an amusing and even charming advertisement. But, were similar footage found in the hands of a child molester there would be serious legal consequences. Pornography in general is not so hard to define. If the material in question is enjoyed by working class people and is inexpensive to purchase, then it is pornography. If the material is enjoyed by wealthy or "cultured" people, hangs in a museum, and would be expensive to purchase, then for the most part it is Art and not pornography. Let's take Michelangelo. Here is an artist who seldom portrays women. (I know of no instance, actually.) When the image of a woman was unavoidable to the work, he used male models anyway. (The Sibyls in the Sistine Chapel are a good example.) It is quite obvious that a large proportion of his work is, in fact, homoerotic in nature. Yet, it has been promoted for centuries because it was primarily enjoyed by ruling elites. For that matter, consider the centuries long fascination with images of Christ and the Saints undergoing various tortures. Clearly homoerotic in many cases and juxtaposing images of pain and death with sex. Remove the religious imagery, and anybody found painting or possessing such work will generally be relegated to the fringes of society. When speech is regulated, the meaning of the speech is defined by whether the speaker is in favor with the authorities. This is well understood by the people who propose and pass these laws. Their intention is not only to suppress bad ideas, but to liberate the government from the annoying inconvenience of obeying the law, most especially (but not exclusively) with regard to the government's political opponents. And, as we all know, this issue is particularly insidious when it comes to laws prohibiting free encrypted speech. The art of steganography has reached the point where anything can be "shown" to be a secret message of some kind. Should it be decided to truly enforce these laws, it will be done by letting the cops off the leash to do whatever they please to whomever they like. (1. Why we parole child molesters so we can imprison drug users is beyond me. It has every appearance of complete insanity on the part of the authorities. Or, I suppose, it could mean they don't really care about kids in spite of all their talk on the subject.) Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNGqXXpaWtjSmRH/5AQFhMwf9FU/DU9+iMtflw+CZ0XW3enz+FdC14DzI GD+SIUPm3aBO+MJQHh1ScWNb2ShWVWxMCycHOcKyUhYpAvH2d/oqz6/2Feq2Aw8E 0Oxcg0djy5zri1nZtwTW7QQ2qGOfKyUq+2qJFX3aFFxAMjE2yT5uwvwBRNucPwYC zR40/b5oMJEndp47KUTjnCfbCFmwG2vHZe+3hM6vfm+07zcaRUOJsMgGjsAkTi4I /Rtg4Bxd7L+3AVs8k+ZpJoN7A9ipoOvWGUeXH+s+uwWhS62PtC9DY29sg5f4mG+j qxtCNg14TjfIEiaqjcW3/jm9rk/gFhBiT8f24Aseof2v+T+g0qI5Iw== =zihd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----