Ohio's Supreme Court is to decide whether a law designed to protect children from online predators and Internet pornography is constitutional.
Phil Burress of Citizens for Community Values points out that organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) are the ones that complain. "In Fervor v. New York, a U.S. Supreme Court case in 1969, the ACLU argued that child pornography should be legal once it's produced, and that argument still permeates the ACLU today," explains Burress. "They believe that child pornography should be legal for anyone to buy, sell, or trade, and also [that] it has no age restrictions. In other words, they have argued that children have the same First Amendment rights as adults." The plaintiff, the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, contends the Ohio law is too vague. However, Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray opposes. Burress says that this is the usual spin from the ACLU, which also argues that current state and federal laws banning obscene material goes too far. The family advocate adds that the absurdity of the ACLU arguments is plain because any normal human being understands that children need to be protected.
If you believe OneNewsNow.com is an important source for Christian news, please consider a small tax-deductible gift for this service.
