As ACB clarified repeatedly in her hearings, SC Justices don't bring up topics. There has to be a legitimate case heard and appealed by every level of the judicial system before it gets to the SC. And even then they have a choice to not hear it if they decide to defer back to the lower court, cite established precedent or both.
Also the porn star said that sex workers are entitled to their first amendment rights. Lol.
Then there is no issue unless the porn industry comes up. And if it does and they put restrictions on it -- it 's still no loss to the world.
Personally -- I saw a few porn films when I was in my twenties. They never struck me as erotic -- they were just so stupid.
However -- and I know you will not believe me when I say this. Being "sensitive" in a psychic manner does allow you to grab things most people don't feel. This was in the days of video cassettes ( before DVD's) when films were rented.
I was a newlywed and asked my husband what it was about porn that men found so fascinating. He said he thought most of it was pretty dumb, but I would need to judge for myself (which, was how we ended up with two "popular" films of the day.)
When I touched the videocassettes -- there was (for want of a better term) an "aura" of darkness attached to it -- very unhealthy, very unholy, and frankly replusive. Weirdly -- the films themselves were nowhere near as bad as the attachments of (for want of a better term) "desires" that had built up around the physical videocassette presumably by men who had watched the stupid film and let their imaginations go haywire.
Now -- believe me or don't - makes no difference to me -- but the "problem" (if you want to call it that) is more with the imaginations which take flight and solidify into (for want of a better term) "tangible suggestion" that can be picked up by sensitive people. Someone like me will pick it up and say, "Ick! Aura pollution" and say a few prayers to clear out.
Someone who is sensitive and doesn't know it or doesn't realize he (or she) has been polluted by this build up can go out and act on it. That's where you get your sex crime.
But like I said...no loss to the world if this stuff is restricted. It is far more dangerous than people realize.
Funny choice of photo. Like the pensive face of a woman thinking is something so foreign in the porn industry that it's scary. And how dare she have a bunch of babies, be brilliant and attractive. Who does she think she is?
Answer: The newest Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America.
I don't know if ACB alone could introduce the topic of porn into the Supreme court. After all, Kavanaugh is Catholic too and it hasn't come up yet.
But if restrictions were put on this so-called "industry" --that would be no loss to the world.
As ACB clarified repeatedly in her hearings, SC Justices don't bring up topics. There has to be a legitimate case heard and appealed by every level of the judicial system before it gets to the SC. And even then they have a choice to not hear it if they decide to defer back to the lower court, cite established precedent or both.
Also the porn star said that sex workers are entitled to their first amendment rights. Lol.
Then there is no issue unless the porn industry comes up. And if it does and they put restrictions on it -- it 's still no loss to the world.
Personally -- I saw a few porn films when I was in my twenties. They never struck me as erotic -- they were just so stupid.
However -- and I know you will not believe me when I say this. Being "sensitive" in a psychic manner does allow you to grab things most people don't feel. This was in the days of video cassettes ( before DVD's) when films were rented.
I was a newlywed and asked my husband what it was about porn that men found so fascinating. He said he thought most of it was pretty dumb, but I would need to judge for myself (which, was how we ended up with two "popular" films of the day.)
When I touched the videocassettes -- there was (for want of a better term) an "aura" of darkness attached to it -- very unhealthy, very unholy, and frankly replusive. Weirdly -- the films themselves were nowhere near as bad as the attachments of (for want of a better term) "desires" that had built up around the physical videocassette presumably by men who had watched the stupid film and let their imaginations go haywire.
Now -- believe me or don't - makes no difference to me -- but the "problem" (if you want to call it that) is more with the imaginations which take flight and solidify into (for want of a better term) "tangible suggestion" that can be picked up by sensitive people. Someone like me will pick it up and say, "Ick! Aura pollution" and say a few prayers to clear out.
Someone who is sensitive and doesn't know it or doesn't realize he (or she) has been polluted by this build up can go out and act on it. That's where you get your sex crime.
But like I said...no loss to the world if this stuff is restricted. It is far more dangerous than people realize.
Ah yes, banning the most dangerous and evil industry in the world that has helped ruin our nation is an evil right wing thing?
Noooooo not my heckin pornerinos! How will I live without seeing sex workers fake an orgasm????
YEAH YEAH FUCK THAT PUSSYYYY
Learn to act. Or mine coal.
Will they be moaning the words?
I only understand them when they're moaning
Funny choice of photo. Like the pensive face of a woman thinking is something so foreign in the porn industry that it's scary. And how dare she have a bunch of babies, be brilliant and attractive. Who does she think she is? Answer: The newest Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America.