Congress Moves To Ban Child Sex Dolls

[emilynghiem]

Supreme Court Strikes Down Ban On 'Virtual' Child Pornography

Supreme Court Strikes Down Ban On 'Virtual' Child Pornography
WASHINGTON -- In a strong defense of the First Amendment, the Supreme Court struck down a law banning "virtual" child pornography, which uses explicit images -- often computer-generated -- that appear to depict children engaged in sexual acts.

In a 6-3 decision, the court said that the statute was "overbroad and unconstitutional," citing language that bars any depiction that "appears to be" of a minor engaged in sexual conduct, or that conveys that impression. Congress had said the prohibitions were needed because pedophiles might use such material to either whet their appetites or entice children into sexual acts.

But, writing for the court's majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said, "The mere tendency of speech to encourage unlawful acts is not a sufficient reason for banning it."

The 1996 Child Pornography Protection Act was passed out of concern that pornography laws hadn't kept pace with computer technology that its sponsors said had "opened the door to new means of producing a virtually limitless variety and quantity of high-quality child pornography."

In 1982, the high court ruled that child pornography isn't protected by the First Amendment because its production involved the actual exploitation of real children. In Tuesday's decision, Justice Kennedy wrote that "These images do not involve, let alone harm, any children in the production process."

What creep challenged that? Nothing screams pedophile like I'm suing to see virtual child porn

Yes and no SassyIrishLass
I know a civil rights and free speech activist
(atheist and progay radical liberal) who championed
the KKK right to march in Houston as a free speech issue.

The concept of defending the rights of any person
even if we diametically disagree in order to defend our own
is also a principle that motivates some of these lawsuits.

You are right, the same way legalization of marijuana was largely
promoted because people wanted their own recreational use,
of course there are people only pushing for their ulterior self interests.

But not all.

I don't agree with either pro or anti gay marriage pushing
their agenda through govt, but on Constitutional grounds
I will defend them both against infringements by the other
if EITHER SIDE attempts to abuse govt to establish their
own faith based biases or beliefs discriminating against the other.

And I don't agree with either one, they are both too biased for me.
But they both have equal rights to express and exercise their beliefs
for themselves without govt infringement, so I will defend that on principle
regardless of the content of their beliefs I don't agree with pushing through govt.

 

[radical right]

I don't like child porn...period. Real or virtual and if someone is watching it or defending it then they have a severe problem

As Justice Anthony Kennedy said, would you ban somebody writing an explicit version of romeo and Juliette?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I don't like child porn...period. Real or virtual and if someone is watching it or defending it then they have a severe problem

As Justice Anthony Kennedy said, would you ban somebody writing an explicit version of romeo and Juliette?

It's CHILD porn....are you actually defending it?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Yeah...this is a no brainer. Good name for the bill though, CREEPER Act

Report: Congress Moves to Ban Child Sex Dolls

Congress is moving to ban child sex dolls in the United States, following in the footsteps of other countries which have outlawed their importation.

In an email to the Weekly Standard, Rep. Dan Donovan (R-NY) declared, “When I saw articles on the issues of child sex dolls abroad, I knew I had to act immediately to stop the proliferation of them within the United States.”

As reported by the Weekly Standard, Donovan “has proposed the Curbing Realistic Exploitative Electronic Pedophilic Robots (CREEPER) Act to ban their import and make possession of them illegal,” citing his career of “locking up pedophiles.”

“Every case has stayed with me — there is no situation where a child was hurt or victimized that doesn’t leave your thoughts,” Donovan proclaimed, adding, “I will do everything possible to stop crimes against children.”

Report: Congress Moves to Ban Child Sex Dolls | Breitbart

Dear SassyIrishLass
Why not use these products as bait to get sick people into therapy?
In order to get one, they could be allowed within therapy programs
where participants are safely detained and supervised,
screened and treated for whatever disorders or addictions they have.

Detox programs issue regulated amounts of drugs while treating patients.

Why not treat these pedophile addictions like other diseases,
and set up safe treatment and supervised programs to
keep both the patients and the public safe from dangerous threats?

I'm glad to see somebody bringing up the other side of the issue, because I think this ban might be kind of stupid. If someone with pedophilia urges can get their kick with the use of the doll that looks like a child instead of grabbing a real child off the street is that not a good thing?

 

[radical right]

As Justice Anthony Kennedy said, would you ban somebody writing an explicit version of romeo and Juliette?

It's CHILD porn....are you actually defending it?

Now Romeo and Juliette is child porn? The law needs to protect children, but it has resulted in children being convicted of creating and distributing child porn by taking a naked selfie. What can we do to protect children imitating adults.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

As Justice Anthony Kennedy said, would you ban somebody writing an explicit version of romeo and Juliette?

It's CHILD porn....are you actually defending it?

Now Romeo and Juliette is child porn? The law needs to protect children, but it has resulted in children being convicted of creating and distributing child porn by taking a naked selfie. What can we do to protect children imitating adults.

Virtual child porn. I could not care less about Romeo and Juliet.

 

[TNHarley]

Someone actually makes that shit?

 

[Tilly]

Yeah...this is a no brainer. Good name for the bill though, CREEPER Act

Report: Congress Moves to Ban Child Sex Dolls

Congress is moving to ban child sex dolls in the United States, following in the footsteps of other countries which have outlawed their importation.

In an email to the Weekly Standard, Rep. Dan Donovan (R-NY) declared, “When I saw articles on the issues of child sex dolls abroad, I knew I had to act immediately to stop the proliferation of them within the United States.”

As reported by the Weekly Standard, Donovan “has proposed the Curbing Realistic Exploitative Electronic Pedophilic Robots (CREEPER) Act to ban their import and make possession of them illegal,” citing his career of “locking up pedophiles.”

“Every case has stayed with me — there is no situation where a child was hurt or victimized that doesn’t leave your thoughts,” Donovan proclaimed, adding, “I will do everything possible to stop crimes against children.”

Report: Congress Moves to Ban Child Sex Dolls | Breitbart

Dear SassyIrishLass
Why not use these products as bait to get sick people into therapy?
In order to get one, they could be allowed within therapy programs
where participants are safely detained and supervised,
screened and treated for whatever disorders or addictions they have.

Detox programs issue regulated amounts of drugs while treating patients.

Why not treat these pedophile addictions like other diseases,
and set up safe treatment and supervised programs to
keep both the patients and the public safe from dangerous threats?

I'm glad to see somebody bringing up the other side of the issue, because I think this ban might be kind of stupid. If someone with pedophilia urges can get their kick with the use of the doll that looks like a child instead of grabbing a real child off the street is that not a good thing?

IF that’s how it would work, yes it would be a good thing.
But what IF it has the opposite effect?
I don’t think anyone knows or that it’s a subject that lends itself to research - ethically speaking

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Yeah...this is a no brainer. Good name for the bill though, CREEPER Act

Report: Congress Moves to Ban Child Sex Dolls

Congress is moving to ban child sex dolls in the United States, following in the footsteps of other countries which have outlawed their importation.

In an email to the Weekly Standard, Rep. Dan Donovan (R-NY) declared, “When I saw articles on the issues of child sex dolls abroad, I knew I had to act immediately to stop the proliferation of them within the United States.”

As reported by the Weekly Standard, Donovan “has proposed the Curbing Realistic Exploitative Electronic Pedophilic Robots (CREEPER) Act to ban their import and make possession of them illegal,” citing his career of “locking up pedophiles.”

“Every case has stayed with me — there is no situation where a child was hurt or victimized that doesn’t leave your thoughts,” Donovan proclaimed, adding, “I will do everything possible to stop crimes against children.”

Report: Congress Moves to Ban Child Sex Dolls | Breitbart

Dear SassyIrishLass
Why not use these products as bait to get sick people into therapy?
In order to get one, they could be allowed within therapy programs
where participants are safely detained and supervised,
screened and treated for whatever disorders or addictions they have.

Detox programs issue regulated amounts of drugs while treating patients.

Why not treat these pedophile addictions like other diseases,
and set up safe treatment and supervised programs to
keep both the patients and the public safe from dangerous threats?

I'm glad to see somebody bringing up the other side of the issue, because I think this ban might be kind of stupid. If someone with pedophilia urges can get their kick with the use of the doll that looks like a child instead of grabbing a real child off the street is that not a good thing?

IF that’s how it would work, yes it would be a good thing.
But what IF it has the opposite effect?
I don’t think anyone knows or that it’s a subject that lends itself to research - ethically speaking

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children slammed the suggestion and said child sex dolls risked ‘desensitizing’ offenders.

The NSPCC’s development head, Jon Brown, said: “There is no evidence to support the idea that the use of so-called child sex dolls helps potential abusers from committing contact offences against real children.

“And in fact there is a risk that those using these child sex dolls or realistic props could become desensitized and their behavior becomes normalized to them, so that they go on to harm children themselves, as is often the case with those who view indecent images.”

https://nypost.com/2017/08/03/outrage-over-push-to-give-pedophiles-child-sex-dolls/

 

[radical right]

Virtual child porn. I could not care less about Romeo and Juliet.

Actually the subject is child sex dolls. The supreme court has already drawn a line around to protect children, to require the actual involvement of children. Technology has made it hard for the law to keep up, without running up against other established rights.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Virtual child porn. I could not care less about Romeo and Juliet.

Actually the subject is child sex dolls. The supreme court has already drawn a line around to protect children, to require the actual involvement of children. Technology has made it hard for the law to keep up, without running up against other established rights.

You're sorta creeping me out...and you brought virtual porn into it first.

 

[radical right]

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children slammed the suggestion and said child sex dolls risked ‘desensitizing’ offenders.

The NSPCC’s development head, Jon Brown, said: “There is no evidence to support the idea that the use of so-called child sex dolls helps potential abusers from committing contact offences against real children.

Next they will pass laws against violent video games, because they desensitize people to murder. Do you want to ride that slippery slope?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children slammed the suggestion and said child sex dolls risked ‘desensitizing’ offenders.

The NSPCC’s development head, Jon Brown, said: “There is no evidence to support the idea that the use of so-called child sex dolls helps potential abusers from committing contact offences against real children.

Next they will pass laws against violent video games, because they desensitize people to murder. Do you want to ride that slippery slope?

The topic is child sex dolls...you've went to virtual porn, Romeo and Juliet and now to video games.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

But Planned Parenthood can still sell body parts of aborted children for profit, right?

That's not obscene, right?

 

[bripat9643]

Yeah...this is a no brainer. Good name for the bill though, CREEPER Act

Report: Congress Moves to Ban Child Sex Dolls

Congress is moving to ban child sex dolls in the United States, following in the footsteps of other countries which have outlawed their importation.

In an email to the Weekly Standard, Rep. Dan Donovan (R-NY) declared, “When I saw articles on the issues of child sex dolls abroad, I knew I had to act immediately to stop the proliferation of them within the United States.”

As reported by the Weekly Standard, Donovan “has proposed the Curbing Realistic Exploitative Electronic Pedophilic Robots (CREEPER) Act to ban their import and make possession of them illegal,” citing his career of “locking up pedophiles.”

“Every case has stayed with me — there is no situation where a child was hurt or victimized that doesn’t leave your thoughts,” Donovan proclaimed, adding, “I will do everything possible to stop crimes against children.”

Report: Congress Moves to Ban Child Sex Dolls | Breitbart

How will that stop crimes against children? It's more likely that it will promote them.

 

[radical right]

You're sorta creeping me out...and you brought virtual porn into it first.

That's because the US Supreme court already ruled 6-3 on it. The law against child sex dolls is nearly identical to the law against virtual child porn, with the same arguments, and reasons, and supports for enacting the law.

If you want to protect children how about stopping school shootings by taking away peoples 2nd amendment rights.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

You're sorta creeping me out...and you brought virtual porn into it first.

That's because the US Supreme court already ruled 6-3 on it. The law against child sex dolls is nearly identical to the law against virtual child porn, with the same arguments, and reasons, and supports for enacting the law.

If you want to protect children how about stopping school shootings by taking away peoples 2nd amendment rights.

You're all over the map, dude. Go annoy someone else

 

[Tilly]

If you want to protect children how about stopping school shootings by taking away peoples 2nd amendment rights.

Uggghhh. We need a name (like Godwin’s Law) for those lefties who can’t wait to inappropriately throw in their desire for gun grabbing.

 

[radical right]

If you want to protect children how about stopping school shootings by taking away peoples 2nd amendment rights.

You're all over the map, dude. Go annoy someone else

You have the 1st amendment, and the 2nd amendment. You end up going against against both of them in order to vigorously protect children.

 

[Tilly]

You're sorta creeping me out...and you brought virtual porn into it first.

That's because the US Supreme court already ruled 6-3 on it. The law against child sex dolls is nearly identical to the law against virtual child porn, with the same arguments, and reasons, and supports for enacting the law.

If you want to protect children how about stopping school shootings by taking away peoples 2nd amendment rights.

What does gun grabbing have to do with whether or not child sex dolls will stop paedos sexually abusing children (or exacerbate the issue) - the topic of the thread!