Porn, Even Dildos, In The Great State Of Washington
Together, with our allies, we killed the ‘porn tax’ scheme. The fight however is not over.
Legislators who have forgotten their oath to defend the Constitution have decided to continue the fight, to take a new tack. That of ‘harm to minors.’ They have introduced House Bill 2286.
2286 is a big and encompassing bill. It proposes to do a great number of things, but it is important to understand that it has been introduced a time or two before, and was initially written to do away with Abercrombie and Fitch advertising which apparently some legislators find offensive.
In a nutshell it declares that pornography, erotica, and dildos (odd how they think of dildos) are harmful to children. That declaration made, it seeks to regulate all such things out of existence.
Where the bill gets truly fucked up though is in its definition of pornography. It declares that ass cheeks are pornography unless they are completely covered by opaque cloth. It also declares that the female breast is pornography unless it is completely covered by opaque cloth. As pornography, these things would of course fall under regulation by the bill.
This of course means that your Sears Catalog would be deemed porn and harmful to children because Sears advertises panties that do not entirely cover ones butt cheeks. Victoria’s Secret would truly be hardcore according to these folks. Additionally the bill would go after things such as parenthood magazines that depict breast-feeding and breast cancer wellness guides that portray the naked breast.
You may be thinking that no legislator could be so stupid as to try and declare vanilla clothing catalogs, parenting magazines, and breast health materials as harmful to children and in need of severe regulation, but if you are thinking such a thing, you are wrong. They truly are.
You don’t have to take my word for it though; you can find the bill here. Section 2, part 13 is exactly what you are looking for.
Moving away from the proposed regulation of clothing catalogs and literature on health, I should mention exactly what the bill would do to this blog.
If passed the bill would declare that this blog is ‘harmful to minors.’ As such, under the bill, you would only be allowed to access the blog if I charged you to do so, and if you used a credit card to pay me. Of course that would mean the end of this blog. That is the true intent of this legislation, and the true intent of those who have brought the legislation forward.
Just who is it that thinks underwear advertisements, health journals, and breast-feeding information are destroying our kids? We must of course name names. Unlike the Porn-Tax bill that was a 100% Democrat effort, this bill is bipartisan and sponsored by a mix of Democrats and Republicans. Religious moralists all.
Representative Dan Kristiansen
I know that it is a great deal of work, but we have proven with the Porn Tax that your email messages make a tremendous impact. I ask that all of you who enjoy this blog drop a line to these legislators. Let them know that they are in office to protect the rights of their citizens, not to destroy the freedoms that make our country great. Remind them that their personal religious beliefs have no place within the laws of the State of Washington. Remind them that they swore an oath to uphold the First Amendment of our Constitution.
With your help, we will stop this idea in its tracks. Without your help, it will become the law of Washington State.
Representative Barbara Bailey is the prime sponsor of the bill, so a phone call to her about her repressive idea would be extremely helpful. Her office can be reached at:
360-786-7914 Perhaps as with Representative Miloscia last week, we can so jam her phone lines that they will have to be turned off.
Comments
In case I am misunderstood, let me preface by saying that yes, you should contact your congressman, and yes, you should make it very clear that they will be replaced in 2010 if they are so stupid as to support this bill.
But you must understand that this bill is not likely to pass. This is the sort of nonsensical harrassment bill that the losing party in the previous election will bring forward in the hopes of making the recently elected party look bad. This is so that you, as a voter, will see them react against the bill, so that the various involved paid media supporters will say, “See, you shouldn’t have voted for them, they don’t care about your children and they never have.” Dems and Pubs have both done it. It’s a public denouncement without having the punch of being an actual law.
The real criminality of this sort of bullshit legislation is that it will fill time in the house with the useless pontificating and talk, while your country is going down the tubes because its legislative body has its collective head up its collective ass. The word “crisis” means nothing to these people. They are bent on avoiding the issue of economic disaster at all costs by showing you a bright, shiny object and getting your panties (yes, you men too) all bunched up in a knot worrying about your personal freedoms.
Right now, the average citizen should be worried about whether or not they can afford a dildo, not whether or not it will damage children. You know what will damage children? Living on the street without food, clothing or shelter.
Tell your congressperson that.
Posted by: Alexis | February 23, 2009 12:11 PM
We have a strong Constitution until it involves our ability to look at what we want and read what we want if that want has to do with sex. Then we don't seem to mind making laws...The other Amendment that is right now under severe assult is the 2nd. I claim that without the later the First is in serious trouble.
Posted by: bdenied | February 23, 2009 12:28 PM
I am thinking of "The religion of peace" as I read what you say, "It declares that ass cheeks are pornography unless they are completely covered by opaque cloth. It also declares that the female breast is pornography unless it is completely covered by opaque cloth. As pornography, these things would of course fall under regulation by the bill." In Moslem countries all those parts are covered in general, so there cannot be any pornography, as such, unless the face of the woman happens to accidentally drop a veil. I guess we have some things to learn from them. Your esteemed and learned legislature is obviously ahead of us in this respect.
Posted by: susans.pet | February 24, 2009 3:44 PM
MM: I want to thank you for bringing this to our attention!! Though I am not a resident of Washington state, I am outraged and have sent emails to all but three of the representatives. I plan to compose and send the remaining three tomorrow. I became an American citizen this past year. I refuse to remain silent while zealots attempt to trample our rights of speech and expression as defined in our constitution. I wish to applaud all who have taken a stand on this issue. I have attempted to ring Representative Bailey's office only to find the line continually busy. I will not cease until this bill is soundly defeated. MM, I sincerely thank you once again.
Posted by: Amy | February 26, 2009 1:04 AM
alexis,
Ordinarily I would agree with your thoughts completely. Both parties manufacture 'crisis' for votes, and both parties sponsor bills to make the other party look bad.
Three things I must point out about this particular bill make it different though:
1. It has passed the legislature before. It passed, and was vetoed by a previous Governor.
2. It is sponsored by members of both parties, not just the loosing party.
3. A very similar bill passed Congress and was signed by the President. The US Supreme Court put an end to it.
This one does have a good chance of passage. Not this year, but next.
The courts would rule it unconstitutional, but not until after damage had been done.
M
Posted by: Milliscent | February 26, 2009 5:37 PM
bdenied,
I agree with you 100% about the importance of our Second Amendment and I will defend it just as strongly as our First.
M
Posted by: Milliscent | February 26, 2009 5:39 PM
Susan's pet,
Your point is well made. Certainly there are those here, both within and without government who wish to create an American theocracy. Who wish to turn back the clock to a time before the Reformation and the Age of Reason. It is incumbent upon all of us who cherish freedom to stop them.
M
Posted by: Milliscent | February 26, 2009 5:42 PM
Amy,
Thank you for your emails, and the attempted calls to Mrs. Bailey's office. I greatly appreciate your help and activism.
The news reported that the prior bill generated so many calls that it's prime sponsor had to turn his phones off, perhaps Mrs. Bailey is receiving a similar number of them. That would account for the busy signal I suppose since each legislative office has a large number of lines that can ring at the same number.
M
Posted by: Milliscent | February 26, 2009 5:45 PM