CrimsonWeltall

FUN FACT: Burglars usually knock on doors to alert the people inside to the fact that they are about to be robbed.

Horrible

Ernst Mayr

look at their f***ing pictures

Daily Showesque Word Count Freedom: 19 Liberty: 5 Terror: 14 Terrorist: 12 Democracy: 9 Democratic: 6 Poor showing by liberty.

tell me more!

THE FAITHFUL CENTRAL BIBLE CHURCH IS FULLA SECULARIST ATHEIST LIBRUL HEATHENS WHO JUST WANT TO REMOVE THE WORD "GOD" FROM THE PUBLIC ARENA!!!! also, aren't all churches "Bible Churches"?

oh s*** he's angry now

Gotta have something to follow the Passion of the Christ ROBBED!!!! stoey.

OH SNAPPED

If we're going to have sex offender lists like this, shouldn't we have murderer, armed robber, assault lists too?

RELST 251 - Viking Mythology ECON 465 - Mathematical Economics (Game Theory) CS 498 pgd - Game Design Studio CS 498 lbp - Education in CS

I think I'm going to become a politician and propose a law called the Child Protection from Pornography Act. It will have 2 points. 1) People making child porn get life in prison. 2) People who have used the name NUKE_CLEVELAND on message boards will be executed. Anyone who does not support this legislation clearly is in favor of promoting child pornography.

lol, are you serious? The interview some anti-ACLU guy and he says HAW HAW HAW I BET THE ACLU WULD WANT THEM NOT SENTENCED AT ALL and you take that as a fact that teh ACLU defends child porn? Perhaps he should have gone farther and said "If the ACLU had had things its way, they would eat babies while they have sex on their Satanic altars", because this guy's opinion is clearly fact.

First one is about a law which could make illegal any content "offensive to minors". A court found the law to be far too broad and struck it down. Does not include the ACLU defending child pornography. Second one is about COPA, which we already went over. Did you read this 41-page PDF document or did you simply do a google search for "ACLU child porn" and post whatever sites came up? Third one is AGAIN not about child pornography, but about children possibly being exposed TO pornography. Like the others, this law was determined to be too broad. For example, a child has access to the Hot Chick Contest here on Soxtalk. If whitesoxfan99 posted an overly-sexual (define this however you want) picture on there and some 12 year old Sox fan happened to see it, should whitesoxfan99 or possibly the mods/admins of Soxtalk face legal problems? OHHHHHHHHH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

WTF? None of these 3 new links are even about the same cases from the earlier links. The first one is from some service you have to sign up for and has no details about what law it's referring to. The second and third ones are about mandatory internet filtering for public libraries. The ACLU argued that the internet filters which were going to be used block MORE than just child pornography and obscene materials, and thus were restricting free speech. It seems like you don't read my posts any more than you read the websites you link to. You make this sassy-ass GAME SET MATCH post and then when I show that none of the links were about child porn, you're just like WHATEVA WHATEVA.

This article is about a proposed law against "virtual" child pornography. It could prosecute people who made pornography which "seems" like it features minors, even if it doesn't. So basically any porn which features women which look young or fake, animated pornography which has characters which look underage. The article is NOT about actual child pornography. It also features this sentence: According to William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, the ACLU has called pornographic material featuring children "wholly protected by the First Amendment." Of course anyone can go to the ACLU's website and see that the ACLU does not say any such thing. NOT GAME. This article is not about child pornography either. It is about a convicted child molester being banned from all city parks. The ICLU argued that it was unfair to ban a child molester if they do not also ban rapists and murderers. NOT SET. Again, not about child pornography. This article is about the famous -and usually misrepresented- case about the ACLU and NAMBLA. After their son was killed by 2 men, the parents sued NAMBLA being NAMBLA "gave the murderers courage" because they had visited the NAMBLA website. The ACLU argued that this was shifting personal responsibility from the people who actually committed the crime to a third party. NOT MATCH. Care to try again? Perhaps this time with a news site or at least a site with some credibility?

Please show where the ACLU supported child pornography. Did you even read this list? ACLU fights Creationism: GOOD ACLU fights Creationism: GOOD ACLU fights religious abstinence program in schools: GOOD ACLU fights Christmas display on City Hall: PICKY, BUT NOT HORRIBLE ACLU supports gay marriage: FINE ACLU supports gay adoption: FINE ACLU protects free speech: GOOD ACLU fights prayer before govt meeting: PICKY, BUT NOT HORRIBLE etc etc Would you like to point out which of these cases is SPECIFICALLY anti-Christian or promoting ALL of what is wrong with America?

As clearly seen in George "I haven't made a single mistake" W. Bush.

We must prepare the world for The Rapture!

Look. The Cubs went to a lot of trouble to go to Africa and capture LaTroy Hawkins because they play a lot of hot day games. It would be a waste to not play him.

Hmmmm Kerry won in the exit polls but lost the election...perhaps the exit polls just had a lot of Kerry voters. NO KIDDING

There's no need for accountability because Bush doesn't there have been any mistakes.

It's still a beta, so it's still free.

The Bible is a significant piece of literature and can be taught in a fair manner. In one of my high school English classes, we read the story of Abraham and Isaac and the Book of Ruth.