On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:35:04 -0600, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 21:23 -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 08:51:55PM +0100, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
>> > I'm not sure, how »pornography« is defined in the US and I really
>> > didn't intend to join your nice discussion, but could you please
>> > keep in mind, that it just show rough pixely pictures of a drawn
>> > woman?
>>
>> The problem with pornography in the US is that it isn't
>> defined. It's officially "I'll know it when I see it." Tread
>> carefully.
> Add to that, "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" if the
> disk gets in the hand of a juvenile (the younger the "better") and
> the prosecutor is up for re-election or has further political
> political ambitions.
Same goes for gampling software, and violent games. Or, in
some locales, anything that promotes free speech or religion.
manoj
--
I hope you're not pretending to be evil while secretly being
good. That would be dishonest.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
