Utah considers law to mandate ISP's block "harmful" sites

Fri Mar 4 17:01:38 UTC 2005

Richard Irving wrote:

>   I have a way. You want the Internet sites on this list blocked,
> -here-, your account is now _disabled_.
>
> You won't -ever- have to worry about accessing sites you don't like.
>
>   :P
>
>   This is another attempt to legislate something that
> can be solved, or should be solved, with technology.
>
>  After all, we have -all- seen how well the anti-UCE laws
> have worked.
>
>   * cough *
>
>   The last 5 years of politics, have set a record low,
> in my book.
>
>   This law ranks right up there, with the law recently passed
> in one state,  (in the past year, and, of course, a Red State)
> that declared same sex couples living together,
> instead of being married, as criminals, subject to a fine,
> and incarceration.
>
>   Did someone spike the legislative punch bowl, or _what_ ?
>
Umm, we have a longstanding law here in Michigan that defines *any* sex
couples living together as criminals, and the legislature raised the fine
from $300 to $1,000 a few years ago, in a 3 am lame duck session just
before the Republican governor left and became the head lobbyist for the
National Association of Manufacturers.

-- 
William Allen Simpson
    Key fingerprint =  17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26  DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32