Freedom of Speech - Abortion

[Robert Wagers]

     I'm not too stressed about the decency patrols arresting people for 
talking about abortion, but the law does prohibit any" _communication_ 
that describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary 
community standards, sexual...activites or organs."  
	So, take care not to mention sex in your abortion discussions!

R. Wagers
 On Sun, 11 Feb 1996, 
C. W. Tazewell wrote:

> FYI - Bill.
>                    The Hampton Roads Central Library
>                (You don't drive to it; you point to it.)
>                   Your *REASON* to have the Internet
> Digital Library of Hampton Roads           E A S Y  L I N K S
> Front Entrance                              Your WWW Hotlist
> http://wwwp.exis.net/~cwt/    http://www.infi.net/~cwt/easylink.html
>  
>   -------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Date: 12 FEB 1996 00:53:53 GMT 
> From: dplast at exis.net
> Newsgroups: va.general
> Subject: Re: Freedom of Speech (NOT!) 
> 
> > dplast at exis.net writes:
> > cmerrit at exis.net (Charles W. Merritt) writes:
> > Feb.04, 1996
> > My Fellow Virginians and Netizens
> > Our freedom of speech has been taken away from us. Did you realize this.
> > This past week our Federal lawmakers passed new federal law that made it a 
> > crime to take about abortion on the Internet.
> >  
> 
> My thanks to Charles W Merritt for providing these 2 links with more on the 
> abortion on the internet subject:
> #1. //www.eff.org/pub/Alerts/index.html#cda   and
> #2.//www.eff.org/pub/Alerts/schroeder_020696_comstock.announce
> 
> After reviewing them, I found the following excerpt from the Congressional 
> Record to be most interesting, and IMHO, indicative that the new bill does 
> NOT prohibit discussions of abortion on the Internet, any more than it 
> prohibits such discussions in the US Mail.
> 
> Don Plaster, VA Beach
> 
> ============================================
> 
> 
> February 1, 1996		
> 	             CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE
> 
> Mr HYDE.
> 		* * *
> Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield to the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. 
> LOWEY] for the purpose of engaging in a colloquy.
> 
> Mrs. LOWEY. Mr Speaker, I would like to congratulate the gentleman from 
> Virginia  [Mr. BLILEY], the chiarman of the committee, and other members 
> of the conference in bringing this very important conference report to 
> the floor today. However, I would like to bring to your attention one 
> section that is very troubling to me.
> 
> Section 507 amends the preexisting section of the Criminal Code (18 
> U.S.C. 1462) and applies it to the Internet. Now, it was my understanding 
> that your intent behind adopting this provision was to place reasonable 
> restrictions on obscenity and indecency on the Internet. I support this goal.
> 
> However, a section of this act may be constured to curb discussions about 
> abortion. It seems to me this provision would certainly be unconsitutional.
> 
> Mr. HYDE. Well, reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with 
> the gentlewoman that any discussion about abortion, both pro-life and 
> pro-choice rights, is protected by the First Amendment guarantee of free 
> speech; and I certainly agree, nothing in title V should be interpreted 
> to inhibit free speech about the topic of abortion.
> 
> Further, it is correct that our principal intent in adopting this 
> provision was to curb the spread of obscenity and indecency, speech that 
> is not protected by the first amendment, from the Internet in order to 
> protect our children.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Concerns have been raised about the amendment to 18 U.S.C. Section 1462 
> regarding an interactive computer service. Section 1462 generally 
> prohbiots the importation or transportation of obscene matter. Subsection 
> 1462(c) prohibits the importation or interstate carriage of "any drug, 
> medicine, article, or thing designed, adapted, or intended for producing 
> abortion, or for any indecent or immoral use; or any written or printed 
> card, letter, circular, book, pamphlet, advertisement, or notice of any 
> kind giving away information, directly or indirectlym wherem howm or of 
> whom, or by what means any of such mentioned articles, matters or things 
> may be obtained or made***."
> 
> We are talking about the advertisement, sale or procurement of drugs or 
> medical instruments or devices used to bring about an abortion, This 
> language in no way is intended to inhibit free speech about the topic of 
> abortion, nor in any way to limit medical or scientific discourse on the 
> Internet. This amendment to subsection 1462(c) does not prohibit serious 
> discussions about the moral questions surrounding abortion, the act of 
> abortion itself, or the constitutionality of abortion. This statutory 
> language prohibits the use of an interactive computer service for the 
> explicit purpose of selling, procuring or facilitating the sale of drugs, 
> medicines or other devices intended for use in producing abortions. The 
> statutory language is confined to those commercial activities already 
> covered in section 1462(c) of title 18 and in now way interferes with the 
> freedom of individuals to discuss the general topic of abortion on the 
> Internet. 
> 
> [end Congressional Record snippets]
> 
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Don Plaster   dplast at exis.net http://wwwp.exis.net/~dplast/
> Virginia Beach, VA        Home Schooler and Data Normalizer
> Life's @ Beach!                               Extrordinaire
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>