|
|
Post by Meshakhad on Jun 27, 2011 14:32:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Jun 27, 2011 14:43:01 GMT -5
I'm reading the ruling right now and I agree 100%. It's up to the parents, not the government, to monitor what their children are doing.
I also love reading Scalia's opinions on the rare occasion that I agree with them. He always has a biting sarcasm that is hilarious when you agree with him, but maddening when you don't.
This is hilarious:
"One study, for example, found that children who had just finished playing violent video games were more likely to fill in the blank letter in “explo_e” with a “d” (so that it reads “explode”) than with an “r” (“explore”). App. 496, 506 (internal quotation marks omitted). The prevention of this phenomenon, which might have been anticipated with common sense, is not a compelling state interest."
|
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Jun 27, 2011 17:02:39 GMT -5
Knew this would happen ages ago. I don't know why we ruddy well needed a supreme court ruling on it tho. Should have been bloody obvious it's protected under free speech.
|
|
|
|
Post by Smurfette Principle on Jun 27, 2011 17:19:00 GMT -5
Knew this would happen ages ago. I don't know why we ruddy well needed a supreme court ruling on it tho. Should have been bloody obvious it's protected under free speech. This. |
|
|
|
Post by dharmicdalek on Jun 27, 2011 17:24:25 GMT -5
Social Conservatives will ruin anything they can so it was a very damn well needed ruling.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amaranth on Jun 27, 2011 18:13:37 GMT -5
Knew this would happen ages ago. I don't know why we ruddy well needed a supreme court ruling on it tho. Should have been bloody obvious it's protected under free speech. Because we fight this fight with every new medium, sadly. |
|
|
|
Post by banjaxed on Jun 27, 2011 23:12:01 GMT -5
My mom (being the moral guardian she is) thinks that somehow the court is trampling on every parent's constitutional right, somehow. She is the type of person who gets upset when I watch R rated movies without her saying that I'm too young to be watching that kind of stuff despite being 19 years old.
|
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jun 27, 2011 23:18:36 GMT -5
For once the SCOTUS gets it right.
Maybe that's why it's so damn cold down here...
|
|
|
|
Post by Smurfette Principle on Jun 27, 2011 23:20:53 GMT -5
For once the SCOTUS gets it right. Maybe that's why it's so damn cold down here... Now I'm starting to wonder if sending Prop 8 up there would be a bad idea. Also, I may not like his politics, but Scalia is hilarious. |
|
jlujan69
Full Member
unenlightened, backwoods, no-count fundy
Posts: 113
|
Post by jlujan69 on Jun 28, 2011 0:56:39 GMT -5
"What sense does it make to forbid selling to a 13-year-old boy a magazine with an image of a nude woman, while protecting the sale to that 13-year-old of an interactive video game in which he actively, but virtually, binds and gags the woman, then tortures and kills her?" Breyer said."
Good question, Justice Breyer.
|
|
|
|
Post by shadoom2 on Jun 28, 2011 1:26:48 GMT -5
I'm disappointed by this. Video games distract society from actual, important, issues, and I think anything that restricts their production or sale (or that of any other distracting product) is good.
I also think that using freedom of speech to protect things that made for commercial gain is ridiculous, the point of free speech is to protect political dissent and self expression, not to allow corporations to profit from obscenity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Jun 28, 2011 1:34:32 GMT -5
I'm disappointed by this. Video games distract society from actual, important, issues, and I think anything that restricts their production or sale (or that of any other distracting product) is good. Just like books, movies, TV, magazines and the internet, right? |
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jun 28, 2011 1:36:18 GMT -5
I'm disappointed by this. Video games distract society from actual, important, issues, and I think anything that restricts their production or sale (or that of any other distracting product) is good. I also think that using freedom of speech to protect things that made for commercial gain is ridiculous, the point of free speech is to protect political dissent and self expression, not to allow corporations to profit from obscenity. Feel free to move to Iran, then. |
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Jun 28, 2011 1:37:17 GMT -5
I'm disappointed by this. Video games distract society from actual, important, issues, and I think anything that restricts their production or sale (or that of any other distracting product) is good. I also think that using freedom of speech to protect things that made for commercial gain is ridiculous, the point of free speech is to protect political dissent and self expression, not to allow corporations to profit from obscenity. Yes I bet you're totally disappointed with the government telling us exactly what to think/say/do. Am I right? Ironbite-I'm right |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Jun 28, 2011 1:37:51 GMT -5
I'm disappointed by this. Video games distract society from actual, important, issues, and I think anything that restricts their production or sale (or that of any other distracting product) is good. I also think that using freedom of speech to protect things that made for commercial gain is ridiculous, the point of free speech is to protect political dissent and self expression, not to allow corporations to profit from obscenity. Solution: Don't fucking buy video games. |
|
