Selene Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Folks: This is one of those cases where my values can conflict with my parenting. Additionally, does it change your perception of the "crime" if the "sexting" is of males or females. Moreover, does your perception of the "crime" change if you, as the observer are male or female? "Federal Judge in Pa. Backs ACLU, Bars DA from Charging Teens for ‘Sexting’Posted Mar 30, 2009, 07:30 pm CDTBy Martha NeilSiding with the American Civil Liberties Union, a federal judge in Pennsylvania has barred the Wyoming County District Attorney from pursuing threatened felony charges against teenage ______'s he has accused of sending explicit photographs over their cell phones.The controversial case over so-called "sexting" was filed by the ACLU in federal court in Scranton, along with the parents of three ____s. They contend that photographs of the ____s are not pornographic and are protected under the First Amendment. Today U.S. District Judge James Munley issued a temporary injunction barring DA George Skumanick Jr. from pursuing criminal charges against the three teens, reports the Times-Tribune in a breaking story.Two of the photos at issue showed ___s, wearing ____s. The third shows the teen ____________, wearing a ______, after stepping out of the shower, reports the Associated Press.Skumanick, who says he is looking out for the teens' best interests and has done nothing wrong, offered them a chance to participate in an after-school education program on pornography and sexual violence in exchange for dropping potential criminal cases. However, the teens, their parents and the ACLU contend that the teens First and Fourth Amendment rights are violated by the threatened prosecution."Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjohnson Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Sounds like another "is this pornography or not" story. If it is, then it's a crime, if it isn't then it's not. Ho hum.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 G.S.I am not being anti-Canadian when I say this, but the "facts" of the case "socially" are meaningless. To us, as Constitutional citizens of the greatest country to ever occupy this planet the 1st and 4th amendment rights are what is at stake here.I guess it is what always makes Americans so peculiar to the rest of the world, but our individual rights mean everything to us.Hell, they are worth risking my life to protect them for you!Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjohnson Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Define 'great'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 G.S. 1 a: notably large in size : huge b: of a kind characterized by relative largeness —used in plant and animal names c: elaborate , ample9: markedly superior in character or quality ; especially : noble <great of soul>I think that those two of the eleven would qualify. However, 5 and 10 also apply. Great Pronunciation: \ˈgrāt, Southern also ˈgre(ə)t\ Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English grete, from Old English grēat; akin to Old High German grōz large Date: before 12th century1 a: notably large in size : huge b: of a kind characterized by relative largeness —used in plant and animal names c: elaborate , ample <great detail>2 a: large in number or measure : numerous <great multitudes> b: predominant <the great majority>3: remarkable in magnitude, degree, or effectiveness <great bloodshed>4: full of emotion <great with anger>5 a: eminent , distinguished <a great poet> b: chief or preeminent over others —often used in titles <Lord Great Chamberlain> c: aristocratic , grand <great ladies>6: long continued <a great while>7: principal , main <a reception in the great hall>8: more remote in a family relationship by a single generation than a specified relative <great-grandfather>9: markedly superior in character or quality ; especially : noble <great of soul>10 a: remarkably skilled <great at tennis> b: marked by enthusiasm : keen <great on science fiction>11—used as a generalized term of approval <had a great time><it was just great>— great·ness noun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Grieb Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Good for this Federal judge. Put that man or woman on the US Supreme Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjohnson Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I don't need a dictionary definition, I can get that myself. I want to know what you mean by great when you say "the greatest country to ever occupy this planet". The US certainly has some great qualities and certainly some not-so-great ones. I think maybe it's greatness has peaked, at any rate. What about Great Britain, it was pretty great at one time . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 Yep, they were...emphasis on were.They are 0-2 against us and we had to pull their tight little asses out of two "situations" over the last century, you might have read about it, it was in all the papers.Yes we are greater than Great Britain. Pretty much markedly superior in character or quality and especially noble. My country is the greatest country because it came up with the concept of individual rights and put it into effect and defended it globally for over 200 years. Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjohnson Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Ah... ok then. You know, I think objectivism should be called individualism. I don't see that much objectivity in it but I see a great deal of individuality in it. To me, science is the champion of objectivity but objectivism seems to be the champion of anti-collectivism or individualism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Yep, they were...emphasis on were.They are 0-2 against us and we had to pull their tight little asses out of two "situations" over the last century, you might have read about it, it was in all the papers.Yes we are greater than Great Britain. Pretty much markedly superior in character or quality and especially noble. My country is the greatest country because it came up with the concept of individual rights and put it into effect and defended it globally for over 200 years. AdamNope. We got it, essentially, from Great Britain. --Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Ah... ok then. You know, I think objectivism should be called individualism. I don't see that much objectivity in it but I see a great deal of individuality in it. To me, science is the champion of objectivity but objectivism seems to be the champion of anti-collectivism or individualism.If it lacks objectivity it isn't Objectivism.--Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 There is a linkage to British common law, the rights of man and constitutional principles.However, in my opinion, our construct was damn near perfect for its time and for our current time. Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbeaulieu Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 There is a linkage to British common law, the rights of man and constitutional principles.However, in my opinion, our construct was damn near perfect for its time and for our current time. AdamI'd agree to the "construct was damn near perfect for its time." For our current time, I'd agree to the extent that it's applied as intended. That seems to be amiss for as long as I can remember.The perfection is in how minimalist the Constitution's format is. Less is more. In contrast, this amazing document has had its share of interpretations which have skewed it beyond recognition. Subjective in a sense, if you ask me.~ Shane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted April 1, 2009 Author Share Posted April 1, 2009 Yes I agree - "For our current time, I'd agree to the extent that it's applied as intended." I should have modified it as you state in your post.That was passion driving the statements lol.Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now