Michael Medved hosts a nationally syndicated daily radio talk show on which these editorials were aired. You can visit his website at www.michaelmedved.com.
But if the pornography shows adults pretending to be children or realistic images of children generated by a computer, then, justices say, such material is protected by the First Amendment.
This twists the Constitution and its guarantee of freedom of speech which focuses on political speech. But it also distorts the main objection to child pornography, which is not just that pornography corrupts the kids directly involved in productions, but also corrupts society through the dangerous sexualization of children.
This decision, substituting opinions of judges for decisions by the people and their elected representatives, shows the need for more strict constructionists as judges — at all levels.
(Click here to sign up for Catholic Exchange's new state-of-the-art anti-porn filtering service.)
Hollywood’s Latest Display of Christian Bashing
Hollywood has just released a new movie, “Frailty,” about a Christian widower, raising his two boys in Texas with an emphasis on faith and prayer.
The press notes released with the film explicitly compare this movie hero with Moses and Abraham. But the big surprise about this religious guy, in a movie full of tricky plot twists, is that he turns out to be a brutal serial killer — getting his children to help him in murdering strangers with a long-handled axe because he believes God wants him to do it. Why would a movie company invest in this kind of project?
Veteran actor Bill Paxton, who both directed “Frailty” and stars in it, told the press he did the movie because he wants more respect in Hollywood. It’s revealing — and sad — that a frustrated actor would pursue acclaim in the bigoted, anti-religious entertainment industry by offering such a crude and murderous cartoon version of faith.
Are West Bank Settlements the Obstacle to Peace?
Palestinian propagandists say Israeli settlements on the West Bank are the main problem inflaming the Middle East. They insist that if Israel would uproot these towns and cities — home to more than 200,000 Jews — then peace could break out between Israel and a Palestinian state.
But this ignores history, since the PLO formally launched its terror campaign against Israel in 1964, before Israelis controlled a single acre of West Bank land and before any settlements had been established. And no one bothers to ask why a new nation of Palestine must be ethnically cleansed of Jews. After all, Arabs represent nearly 20 percent of Israel proper, and enjoy full voting, civil and economic rights.
Why couldn’t a new Palestinian state of more than three million welcome 200,000 Jews? If that new country won’t guarantee protection and civil rights to a Jewish minority, then how could it live in peace with Israel?
