Porn Wars: The Senate Strikes Back
The University of Maryland caved pretty fast on its plans to screen the XXX film Pirates II: Stagnetti's Revenge in the Student Union when the state Senate started talking about withholding the school's funding. Putting aside the question of whether the university should have been showing such a thing in the first place, was it right for the General Assembly to get involved? Legislators say it's a state institution funded by taxpayer dollars, and they don't want to be paying for this kind of thing. Civil libertarians say the Senate action was a dangerious encroachment by government on free speech. What do you think?
Comments
What do I think?
Ask and you shall receive.
I think if the University of Maryland students really wanted this film, they would have fought tooth and nail to make it happen.
Their caving pretty fast over money is a tell tale sign they haven't a clue how sheepish they really are.
Posted by: Carole | April 3, 2009 10:57 AM
Like the Wizard of OZ Annapolis has spoken!
Never mind the Three Stooges behind the curtains.
A movie intended for an 18 and over crowd and it gets censored.
Only in Maryland.
Posted by: jay | April 3, 2009 11:49 AM
Yesterday there were reports that a Federal court found yet another Maryland law to be unconstitutional.
And yesterday the PG senators were pushing for a bill, probably in violation of the Constitution, to revoke a PG school board contract for better office space (almost all of those same senators voted to give themselves palatial offices a couple of years ago).
Anti-free speech bills are making there way through both houses of the General Assembly. Both houses have already stomped on the second and fourth amendments this year.
I'd say this is just more evidence that the Constitution, Bill of Rights--all personal freedoms--mean nothing to our oath-breaking petty tyrants in Annapolis.
Posted by: D. C. Russell | April 3, 2009 12:21 PM
If it is a free speech issue than the University of Maryland has no codes of conduct for speech, right? Nothing about hate speech? About post-game celebrations (read riots-in-the-making)? Nothing about hanging a flag out a dorm room window? And they don't have free-speech 'zones' do they? They don't ban students with shirts and bad words about Duke, do they?
They have all of the above and then some. You can't claim the First Amendment only when you like it and discard it when it doesn't suit your political fancy.
Oh, and didn't they have Ron Jeremy on their campus three or four times to debate various folks? That's free speech. That's a discussion of the issue. That's germaine. Showing a xxx film and calling it discussion-worthy is a sad attempt to justify themselves.
Posted by: Lori | April 3, 2009 1:14 PM
Scheduling a porn movie on campus during the session? You had to know there would be a reaction. Stupid timing, guys! If the students had waited a couple of weeks, this would have blown over quietly. The movie makers must love the publicity, though.
Posted by: Boomer | April 3, 2009 4:28 PM
I think some people are missing the point. Porn as an alternative to going out and getting drunk? It's like giving out weed to people so they'll drop the crack they're smoking. It's a band-aid - NOT a solution to the problem. And if people fail to see that, then they deserve to have their funds pulled. It's a freaking academic instituion!
Posted by: Anonymous | April 4, 2009 3:26 PM
meanwhile, in california:
http://www.theaggie.org/article/3419
Posted by: oskar holm | April 7, 2009 9:36 AM