is violating the spirit of the first amendment for some pressure group a good idea?

[Phill Lewis <xwingredleader@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

No, it's not. How dare some radical censorship group disguise its true motives 
behind some wholesome charter. From The Register: CP80.org wants all adult 
material banned from Port 80, the standard protocol port for the web, and 
confined to a new port. It also suggests that “ISPs could simply block all IP 
addresses originating from a non-compliant country”. Seems like CP80 might as 
well ask Utah to secede as it clearly has never read The Consitution or the 
heard of the first amendment. Non-compliant in this context seems to be nutjob 
speak for people who don't recognise thought crime and have an open mind. 

 

Again from the register: While Preston previously disclosed her affiliations to 
ICANN, her petition for the new constituency does not mention any of CP80.org’s 
radical policies concerning the internet’s fundamental architecture. 

 

These are Fascist's operating under the guise of protectors of the American 
dream and representing fictional communities which have no interest CP80's anti 
american and anti freedom policies. Sinclair Lewis once said, "When Facism 
comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." which is 
exactly what this is. What's next for CP80? Banning religous materials that 
don't agree with it's overwhelmingly Mormon perspectives?

 

Don't you just love The Register: Utah is 58 per cent Mormon, and according to 
a recent study has the highest consumption of internet pornography of any US 
state, boasting an average of 5.47 porn subscriptions per 1,000 broadband 
users. So it seems they are posing the most threat to none other than 
themselves and are in fact massive hypocrites that love porn more than most. 

_________________________________________________________________
 25GB of FREE Online Storage – Find out more
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665320/direct/01/