North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Utah governor signs Net-porn bill

  • From: William Allen Simpson
  • Date: Wed Mar 23 20:15:56 2005 
David Barak wrote:
This is not correct - on network TV in utah, and on
the "family-friendly" cableco feed, you can see the
various prophylactic manufacturers' ads. 

Remember, this is about "minors".   I'm no expert on the Utah code,
but a simple search showed:

(1) It's illegal to offer contraceptive services to minors.
(2) It's illegal to counsel minors about such services.
(3) If they even ask, you're required to report them, and it's a
    criminal offense to fail to report them.

So, Utah law _already_ means no links to Planned Parenthood et alia.

Note well, everything about sex between "unmarried persons" (of any age)
is illegal "fornication".  So those contraceptive ads had better have
strict showing of married persons....  (Probably not well enforced.)

In addition, the abortion section is egregiously unconstitutional, and
they know it.  So, they actually include sections on reversion when
it's found unconstitutional -- but only by the US Supreme Court, in an
attempt to keep trying for the years waiting on appeals.  (See the
rest of Title 76 chapter 7 "Offenses against the Family".)

And for those of you who actually read the new law, you'll notice that
it prohibits "pornography" on-line.  Anything, at any age.  Blatantly
unconstitutional (legally, only obscenity and actual child molestation
can be prohibited -- and child means "prepubescent").

Note that the chapters on Offenses Against "Family" (7), "Decency" (9),
and "Morals" (10) are more than 3 times as long as "Property" (6, which
has all the usual stuff that most people think of as crime).
Many of the statements I've seen here are very "doom
and gloom" about Utah - honestly, folks, it's not THAT
bad. 
Maybe not to the general public, but how do you get past all the
bedroom peepers?

Did you know your legislators were doing all this?

And did you think about how this affects the Internet?


Steven J. Sobol wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 [email protected] wrote:

Finally, someone who recognizes what this bill is
all about. It merely asks ISPs to provide parents
with a filtering tool that cannot be overridden by
their children because the process of filtering takes
place entirely outside the home.

Are you absolutely sure that that's all the bill will actually do?

Obviously, Dillon didn't read Bellovin's pointers to the actual law.

<rant>
Folks, the Internet as we know it would not have existed had not
certain persons (such as me) volunteered at their local political
campaigns and made regular contact with their local politicians and
political parties.

Get off your behinds, and work on politics.  That means going to a lot
of meetings, and making phone calls, and writing letters.  Not just on
presidential election years, but all the time!

It's important!  (And besides, it's a good start on a social life for
you desk jockeys.)

"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." or vice versa.

"Conviction is worthless unless it is converted into conduct."

 http://www.freedomkeys.com/vigil.htm
</rant>


And make sure your companies are funding CDT.org, EFF.org, and EPIC.org!

--
William Allen Simpson
   Key fingerprint =  17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26  DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32