Quote:
|
Originally Posted by doublep
Alex, do excuse me, I obviously misunderstood this:
"Does the 1st amendment give her the right to lower the living standards of her neighbourhood? Does it give her the right potentially expose her chosen lifestyle to children around that area? To bring people into the neighbourhood that might find children tasty? Think hard."
I thought that was a point *you* were making in regards to the women's activities - you did ask us to think hard!
Paul.
|
Paul, you have to always look at things from the standpoint of "how will it get played in the media:. Without a doubt, the issue of protecting children (which is what the DoJ and Bush claim they are trying to do with 2257) will come up the deal.
THe other thing to remember is that rights cannot be construed in a vacuum. The right to have a dungeon and to run a commercial "whipping for hire" busijness has to be balanced against the rights of the neighbors to lead normal lives and such. It's a give and take, no doubt.
I really do have a feeling that if this is a true occurance, then the local officials have set up a nice harrassment deal to "get those perverts out of town".
Alex