Oregon – Pearl of the Left Coast
Posted on October 11, 2005
Yes you read that correctly. Live – Public – Sex – Acts
The biggest question we should all be asking is, where do the limits exist? I can understand that there is a potential market for such performances. But where are the lines drawn. At the strip club door or on the street corner? At very least isn’t the fact that these women accepted payment for their display qualify them as being guilty of prostitution? And the Club owner isn’t he pandering?
Filming consenting adults in a commercial capacity is one thing. The movie is intended to be viewed in the privacy of a home. But live, in person acts in my opinion crosses that line between a performance and prostitution.
Whether you engage in the actual act, or are a live witness to the act for the purpose of sexual gratification, you are contributing to the act. And the fact that money is being paid to the performer for services rendered is prostitution.
There is no real opinion being expressed. The provision in Oregon’s Constitution is to protect free expression of ideas. There is no idea being expressed other than sexual gratification for money. The left would have you believe that sexual freedom is the opinion being expressed. That is non-sense and an excuse for them to violate a law and get away with it. No more – no less.
Why do you think that the ACLU never got involved?
End of Rant.
Blogger’s 1st Amendment Pledge
If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.
Gribbit is a contributing writer at Stop The ACLU and the co-founder and administrator of Stop The ACLU BlogBurst.
» Filed Under Activist Judges, Illegal Activities
Trackback URL
Comments
10 Responses to “Oregon – Pearl of the Left Coast”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
Stop the ACLU blogburst
-
More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
Porn= protected speech
Ten Commandments= ACLU lawsuit
Jay, feel free to read the ten commandments as often as you want in your bedroom. Just don’t force me to read them on courtroom walls.
The court, in its opinion, goes into great detail outlining how it thinks sex shows fall into the category of free expression.
In summary, the law’s, at least in Oregon, can only prohibit acts, not expressions. The sex show law did not prohibit the act of sex but rather the public expression of it. The law also made no showing as to the consequences of allowing public sex shows. The court specifically supports the City of Portland’s case involving zoning of adult book stores where a showing was made in the law of the negative impact such businesses have on a community.
The court, though they found the law against public sex acts unconstitutional, they also found in favor of the state on the charges of prostitution. It is possible for a needed law to be poorly written and, subsequently, unconstitutional.
If you want a more detailed examination of what’s wrong with this decision, look here.
If the ten commandments are on the court house wall, how is some one forced to read them. I see a lot of bill boards advertising different things, but if I dont want to guy that particular item I dont read the bill board.
Hey Jay I was wondering if you put the ten commandments at the top of your blog I was wondering if the scum would stop reading your information.
You know what else Dethanial? Most of them that hate the Ten Commandments so much already know what they say, so it isn’t like they are having to read them for the first time in their life. A normal person would just glance, and go, yeah…the ten commandments, ho hum. I mean really…who is gonna sit there and actually read them, and if they did why would it be such a huge deal?
Jay, it’s worse than it looks. The court issued its opinion despite the fact that one of the sex performers was under 18.
In the CourtZero.org tradition, I invite everyone to read the reasoning for themselves:
http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S49707.htm
Consenting adults.
Seriously.
Look down on it all you want, but please explain to me how watching a porn is any different in principle. Because this is live? What, an action is illegal if it’s live, but if it’s taped, it’s ok? Kind of an odd principle there.
You draw a line at the door. These people weren’t out in public; they weren’t exposing their “wares” to children or to anyone who wasn’t there by their own free will.
This is a free country. Can we have the tolerance for each other enough to keep it that way?
Anti-American terrorism made legal. They should be stopped, and they know it!