You know how Voltaire said even if he disagreed with your opinion, heâd fight for the death for your right to state it? Iâm betting he never had to fight to the death for the rights of a guy who made child pornography, or if he did, Voltaireâs life was much more interesting than I was led to believe.
Like a dedicated friend forced to back up their buddyâs drunk, racist ramblings at a cocktail party, the forces protecting free speech have been put into an uneasy alliance with sleazemonger Michael Williams
in his battle to be allowed to fraudulently advertise child pornography.
Williams was caught with "some pictures" of children and was apparently using false promises of even more to market his other, legal pornography. He got five years in jail for the kiddie porn itself, and now theyâre arguing about whether to give him another five years for the ads, which
dirty pictures of children but were in fact just perverted lies told to other perverts. His case, which went in front of the Supreme Court this week, can basically be boiled down into a simple, two-sided argument.
Advertising that you have child pornography, even fraudulently, clearly contributes to the exploitation of children, and it is the spirit of child pornography laws to protect said children. Therefore, it should be considered tantamount to the crime itself.