cr> On responses to CDA


Richard Moore

Date: Sun, 14 Jan 1996
Sender: "Andrew R. Mark" <•••@••.•••>
Subject: re: Is CDA constitutional?

While the language of the CDA can, no doubt, be considered at variance with
various constitutional percepts,  the underlying motivation must be
considered valid and constituional, regardless of its impact on the medium.

We live in a country where it is well accepted, both socially and legally,
that the protected class (i.e. persons who do not have adult status) are not
to be given access to materials deemed only suitable for adults.  In fact,
in any community, a person who permits or enables the sale of 'adult'
materials to a 'protected' person is subject to penalities.  Given this
established precept (which has been upheld by various courts), the
insistence that the proposed legislation be simply abandoned is
unreasonable.  In addition, there are plenty of people who truly believe
that faciliated access to such materials will, in the long-run, have a
deliterious affect on their children and society at large.

Focusing on the consitutionality of the proposal instead of the concerns
that broght this legislation will yield a far worse solution.  Instead of
damning the messenger or his message, some support for existing (e.g.
SurfWatch) or potential solutions (e.g. SmartKey) will be a far better
course of action.  As a member of one organization which has been working
towards a technological soloution, it amazes me how little support we've
gotten from those who've been screaming 'down with the CDA.'

One almost gets the impression that many believe that a 'victory' in voting
the CDA down will erase the pressure to address the issue which every
congressman and senator will contiunue to feel.  It won't.

Andrew Mark


 Posted by Richard K. Moore (•••@••.•••) Wexford, Ireland
 Materials may be reposted in their entirety for non-commercial use.