  Version 8.2 |
|
|
|
|
<-- WNest 2.1|
|
Wren's Wrants
& Wramblings
|
Features... News Links Who Is Wren W Nest Logos |
Go to the... |
| Witchvox Chapter: Wren's Nest News | Chapter Page Views: 59,684,440 |
 Bill Would Make Sale Of Sex Toys Illegal In S. Carolina Author: Seanna Adcox, The Associated Press Source: Anderson Independent Mail (SC) Title: BILL WOULD MAKE SALE OF SEX TOYS ILLEGAL IN SOUTH CAROLINA Lucy’s Love Shop employee Wanda Gillespie said she was flabbergasted that South Carolina’s Legislature is considering outlawing sex toys. But banning the sale of sex toys is actually quite common in some Southern states. The South Carolina bill, proposed by Republican Rep. Ralph Davenport, would make it a felony to sell devices used primarily for sexual stimulation and allow law enforcement to seize sex toys from raided businesses. The measure would add sex toys to the state’s obscenity laws, which already prohibit the dissemination and advertisement of obscene materials. People convicted under obscenity laws face up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine. | |
| Community Thoughts: There are 47 comments posted | Reverse Sort |
| "Obscenity Law" Itself Never Constitutional? | Apr 27th. at 3:59:57 pm EDT |
|
Terry (Irvington, Virginia) - Email Me - Web There are many practical reasons why this kind of abuse of obscenity law is absurd. Adding to the list, "vacu-suck" style devices formerly sold via ads in the rear of men's magazines are now present in diabetic supply catalogs, and funded by Medicare. How does one tell a sex toy from a medical appliance, or something "harmful to minors" (allegedly) because it's sexual, from "harm to minors" by censoring "reality" so much teens aren't developed into responsible, self and world aware, young adults? Beyond that, highly credentialled legal commentator Julie Hilden has joined the ranks of those expressing specific technical perspectives on why this style of proposed law is invalid for a far more fundamental reason: "Obscenity" laws themselves are not and have never been valid, were courts to seriously apply Constitutional law properly (at least in post-14th Amendment form) . Neither is "indecency" law, in general "harm to minors" or FCC broadcast related forms. [Web LINK] [Web LINK] n January 20, U.S. District Judge Gary Lancaster - of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, in Pittsburgh - issued what I believe may be a very important right to privacy decision. [....] Over the past several years, the Ashcroft Justice Department has launched an all-out assault on materials it has deemed obscene. Judge Lancaster's opinion underlines one reason why we should be concerned about this campaign: It's not just about speech, but also about individual privacy and individual liberty. Obscenity law is an embarrassment to constitutional law: It is perpetuated even by judges who as much as admit that its application is extremely subjective - and thus that potential violators lack notice as to when they may be overstepping. It's elementary: Vague criminal laws violate due process. And laws banning speech precisely because of the effect it may have on the listener or viewer violate the First Amendment. Yet courts have pretended to ignore these two truths when it comes to obscenity law. Let's hope that Judge Lancaster's novel approach can shock other judges into realizing what they've already known: Obscenity law is unconstitutional for multiple reasons - it strikes blows to fairness, free speech, and sexual privacy, as well. ==== Perhaps it's the intent of corrupt politicians pandering to religious bigotry, overt or institutionalized, to favor illegal censorship, in part because it takes off the table serious legal issues that have no rational explanation, other than that those politicians, and other government agencies they direct, have a long and squallid history of violating the very system of law they're sworn to uphold? Why else would the FCC intimidate TV networks from airing programs about conduct which is legal on the streets of our cities, as well as open discussion of the very issues which are unmistakably serious political matters, by the very nature of civil rights abidgement under color of the very laws restricting discussion of those laws and regulations? "Fvck Censorship", as well as unpixelated depiction of a breast cancer screening or skyclad religious ritual, deserve the highest tests as protected speech given to other legally equivalent content. It's because of pressures from some factions to wrongfully censor that we have such dissident protective doctrine as the 1st Amendment, any former British King's be damned. Strike down obscenity law as unConstitutional, and a far wider range of abusive legal tactics used strategically by RRR groups, less tactically by other bigots, would collapse. That day cannot come too soon. |
| A Little Short Of Logic There. | Apr 27th. at 1:40:11 pm EDT |
|
bigcat (peoria, Illinois) - Email Me They would also have to have a special policy on washing machines and spin dryers as those have often been employed for "ahem" more than washing clothes. In fact, they would have to ban everything that vibrates. Which means back to the hand washboard. |
| Picking Battles | Apr 27th. at 5:05:23 am EDT |
|
Mysteries Child (Garfield, West Virginia) - Email Me "The ACLU got involved in the case, he said, to 'keep the government out of the bedroom.' " In my opinion, a somewhat more appropriate use of the organization's limited resources. As to the scientific value of sex toys... ...does that include research on the positive health effects of sexual satisfaction and release for both partners in a mutually loving relationship?? China has contraband Bibles. Do I see a future in contraband vibrators here?? If I don't, someone else probably does. |
| What Can You Say About | Apr 27th. at 3:46:07 am EDT |
|
WitchPoet (Claremont, California) - Email Me - Web What can you say about a man whose parents named him Guy RALPH after his dad had already suffered with it. Then instead of going by Guy R. Davenport which has a nice ring and is memorable he uses G. RALPH....Well GEE Ralph why don't you use the form of your name that can be made fun of the easiest!!! Being Guy wasn't much fun when I was a kid but by highschool it was cool because it was unique. Of crouse I had Robert for a middle name to use when I was younger instead of Ralph. And come to think of it when he was a kid Gay did NOT yet mean homosexual so I really do not see why he would not use Guy R. Gee Ralph, Sorry to be so hard on you but You chose the form of your name not me : - ) Guy R. W. |
| Where There's A Will, There's A Way. | Apr 26th. at 6:56:57 pm EDT |
|
bigcat (peoria, Illinois) - Email Me Looks like there's going to be a sharp rise in the number of people in the produce section, but not all the carrots are going to wind up in stews. And you might also check out just how many mops and brooms will actually have more uses than just cleaning. The more enterprising will find a way. Those that aren't will find "other" alternatives. |
| Off With Their Hands | Apr 26th. at 6:41:21 pm EDT |
|
arinna (Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina) - Email Me ok so they get rid of all the shower massagers, jaccuzis, phallus shaped handles and give up cukes, bananas and zucchinis, what are they gonna do about the sexual aids we were all born with aka hands? I wonder if this law would make it illegal to display one of my favorite bumper sticker... Safe Sex lies in the palm of your hand! |
| ... [snerk] ... | Apr 26th. at 3:28:18 pm EDT |
|
Storm Summerhaven (Lanark County, Ontario) - Email Me " ... and allow law enforcement to seize sex toys from raided businesses." ROFL ... Well, I'll bet all the boys and girls in blue -- and their partners -- are looking forward to seeing what can get "lost" from the evidence room tonight ... |
| Family Values | Apr 26th. at 10:44:51 am EDT |
|
stalkingwolf (Bullhead City, Arizona) - Email Me will be the next "war cry" of this bill. It must also be said that SC joining Alabama and Georgia is not surprising. That is after all the heart of the You can divorce your wife but shes still your sister country. |
| This Is NOT Representative | Apr 26th. at 8:51:36 am EDT |
|
Watcher in The Wind (Summerville, South Carolina) - Email Me of all republicans nor the legislature as a whole. Please dont take it. I am truly embarrassed at the attention this lunacy is getting and I am appaled at the idea that in leu of fixing the educational and finacial problems of my state that this invidual is so sexxually frustrated that he has to put this bill forward instead of working on real issues. |
| ... | Apr 26th. at 7:54:13 am EDT |
|
Draken (Bronx, New York) - Email Me - Web In case you want to contact Mr. Three-Inch, here's his online profile: [Web LINK] |
| Aw Geez Give Me A Break | Apr 26th. at 12:22:59 am EDT |
|
Spirit MoonShadow (Charleston, South Carolina) - Email Me Literally.......please. These little ol' toys are crucial.....women don't need us around during football season and we get a rest now and then |
| Heh | Apr 25th. at 7:22:34 pm EDT |
|
Perriwinkle the Evil (Montgomery, Alabama) - Email Me I will tell you, the sale of sex toys is still alive here in Alabubba. There's a store about 30 miles away from me in Dothan called Out on a Whim. Heh. But seriously, I think this measure is just there to help all those poor men who are just too damn lazy, idiotic, and ignorant to compete with sex toys. Otherwise, they'd never get laid, and then there'd be less new taxpayers for the government to screw up the ****. Remember, sodomy laws got successfully challenged in the Supreme Court. I'm glad I brought a supply with me when I left Hawai'i. The way this is going, it may be the last state to keep'em legal. |
| This Man, | Apr 25th. at 6:22:19 pm EDT |
|
Libertarian (Langley, Washington) - Email Me - Web Has his head in a very dark place and I doubt that any two people would be strong enough to pull it out. |
| Measure Up | Apr 25th. at 3:56:18 pm EDT |
|
armand (shreveport, Indiana) - Email Me - Web Maybe the guys who are pushing this know there is no way they can measure up to the toys. |
| No Rubber Toys For Dogs In South Carolina | Apr 25th. at 3:46:51 pm EDT |
|
Siara (Annapolis, Maryland) - Email Me This is too funny... Dogs in South Carolina will have to live without their rubber chew toys. Candles will be a thing of the past. Flashlights will have to be smuggled across state lines. And what about products like... *blush*... whipped cream and nutella? I already mentioned salad ingredients in my earlier post regarding this article. Black leather of any type should probably also be banned (it has disagreeably kinky cultural associations) . So ladies, toss out your shoes and purses. Eventually the residents of South Carolina will find themselves living in rose-colored glass bubbles, reading "moral" literature to the soothing accompanyment of muzak. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright 1997-2010 The Witches' Voice Inc. All rights reserved
Note: Authors & Artists retain the copyright for their work(s) on this website.
Unauthorized reproduction without prior permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Website structure, evolution and php coding by Fritz Jung on a Macintosh G5.
Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren’s Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches’ Voice, Inc. TWV is a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization.
Sponsorship: Visit the Witches' Voice Sponsor Page for info on how you
can help support this Community Resource. Donations ARE Tax Deductible.
The Witches' Voice carries a 501(c)(3) certificate and a Federal Tax ID.
Mail Us: The Witches' Voice Inc., P.O. Box 341018, Tampa, Florida 33694-1018 U.S.A.