|Psychology and Mental Health Forum|
|Author:||HesDeltanCaptain [ Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:52 pm ]|
|Blog Subject:||More Measure B (Ca.'s 'condoms in porn' law)|
There is yet more follow-up. Wondering if the new law would be retroactively applied (as was done when in the late 70s the US made child pornography illegal and distributors had to quit selling it lest they break the new law, and later when the true age of one infamous pornstar was discovered and all her films suddenly went from being award-winning films to child pornography) and thus existing videos featuring non-condom use might suddenly be illegal and yanked from shelves I was relieved to see a California judge has knocked the teeth out of the new law. While it remains law, the enforcement of it is now so conditioned and restrictive that it's going to be virtually impossible to actually enforce much less prosecute anyone breaking the law:
"A federal judge has determined that public health risks may trump the First Amendment when filming porn, but not the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments."
"To summarize the ruling:
* The government has a legitimate interest in reducing the spread of sexually transmitted disease. The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health has recorded thousands of cases of STDs among adult film workers. The judge determined the actual harms caused by disease transmission is likely to trump the First Amendment claims in court and thus refused an injunction to block Measure B.
* The measure allows county health officers to enter and inspect any property where he or she believes adult film production is taking place, levy fines, and seize potential evidence without a warrant. The judge points out that this rule technically allows a county health officer to demand access to any building in all of Los Angeles County and is therefore too vague. The judge blocked this part of the law. Officials can get a warrant from a judge if they suspect illegal porn filming is taking place somewhere.
* Because adult films are protected by the First Amendment, fees demanded as part of Measure B must be revenue neutral – they can only cover the cost of administrating the law and cannot be used to generate revenue. There is nothing that indicates the fees being charged for a permit to shoot porn are revenue neutral.
* Requiring a permit to film porn is a form of prior restraint – having to seek the government’s permission to engage in acts of free speech. The judge agreed that Measure B did not contain sufficient safeguards to prevent county officials from abusing this authority. The judge stated that there needs to be the possibility of judicial review in the event of denied licenses or if porn sets are shut down. The judge noted that based on the very vague wording of the measure, an official could shut down a porn set over a cameraman having a cold."
And there was much rejoicing.
|Author:||HesDeltanCaptain [ Sat Nov 30, 2013 3:16 pm ]|
|Blog Subject:||Have to share this one :)|
Reading around yesterday on Dr. Dodson's sexology site, under the Abortion section, there was a photo of a 14yo in Texas recently protesting something re: abortion holding a sign reading, "Jesus isn't a dick, so keep him out of my vagina." Thought it was the best slogan I'd seen in a long time. And googling around, it seems to be original, couldn't find it mentioned anywhere else. Despite my personal objection to abortion (except in the case of rape,) I applaud the young lady for her passion.
|Author:||HesDeltanCaptain [ Thu Nov 28, 2013 12:31 pm ]|
|Blog Subject:||'Dropping a Frog' follow-up|
"Mr. Cambria stated that this Law not only infringes on free expression but rather than protect performers as it currently does it will drive production overseas or off shore where no protection exists."
"Measure B’ condom law blamed for over $450,000 in lost permitting revenue as shoots, jobs move out of state"
On a related note,
"Op-Ed: Open Letter to AIDS Healthcare Foundation - Why Doesn't AIDS Healthcare Foundation Support AB 999?"
Is about how California prisons aren't providing condoms for inmates 'accepting the reality that prisoners are having sex with one another, then being released with an HIV infection rate "According to the University of California, San Francisco, the rate of HIV infection among inmates is eight to ten times higher than among the general population.""
Though I could care less what happens to prisoners while they're prisoners, the article raises a good point of eventually they get released back into society, and if they get infected in prison shouldn't we be providng condoms and other safer sex things to them out of sheer self-interest?
|Author:||HesDeltanCaptain [ Wed Nov 27, 2013 6:15 pm ]|
|Blog Subject:||This is horrible, but...|
Just saw on CNN's 'crawl' that Belgium is contemplating allowing minors (those under 18) to opt for euthanasia if suffering from terminal illnesses. Googling around for more information, the Netherlands already allows it for those 12 and up provided they also have parental consent.
I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, if things are truly hopeless as determined by medical science, forcing individuals to endure pain and suffering if they prefer death for our own comfort isn't fair. On the other hand, while we're alive, there's always hope. Once we're dead there's none. And in the case of children it's just so horrible to imagine the conversation with a doctor "well, you can always kill yourself." Whatever happened to "First, do no harm?"
On a related tangent, one of the issues brought up in the news articles about this is questioning if children are actually competant to make this sort of decision. In the Netherlands it seems they are from 12 onward. Interestingly though, to make love they must be a few years older. So I wonder if this debate, should it come to our shores will revisit sexual age of consent legislation. As it stands right now, if only in the Netherlands, you can choose to die at 12 (with parental consent,) but to make love (reaffirming life) you have to be 16. That doesn't make any sense.
|Author:||HesDeltanCaptain [ Mon Nov 25, 2013 2:07 pm ]|
|Blog Subject:||'Religion Thrives on Misery' (article)|
Must-Read article from psychologytoday.com
Why Is Mississippi More Religious Than New Hampshire?
Religion thrives on misery—and chokes on prosperity.
Published on October 30, 2013 by Nigel Barber, Ph.D.
|All times are UTC|
Powered by phpBB © 2002, 2006 phpBB Group