The crackdown on “virtual” porn has always seemed like a waste of time and resources that could be better spent going after the abusers of real children. And aren’t we better off if these creeps are watching “virtual” porn instead of looking at pornographic pictures of actual children?

BTW– One of the major promoters of the federal law outlawing “virtual” pornography was none other than Mark Foley. Before you accuse Foley of hypocrisy, remember he sent never sent a nasty e-mail to a “virtual” page.

This discussion reminds me of the government’s main argument in the Microsoft Antitrust case. Having failed to provide any evidence whatsoever of harm to consumers, the government’s argument was that since Microsoft invested so many billions in R & D, and since so much of that investment was successful in that it led to great products, all that R & D spending would probably stifle Microsoft’s competitors’ R & D spending in the future. If so, then that’s when consumers would supposedly be harmed.

On the basis of this argument the government wanted to break up Microsoft into several pieces, fine it billions of dollars, force it to make all of its most valuable corporate secrets, such as the source code for Windows, public, and submit to Gestapo-like, random interrogations, including busting into its files and computers. All of this was done by the laughingly named Department of Justice.

The Best of Thomas DiLorenzo

Bill, it’s even worse than that. I am told that if one creates wholly computer-generated images of children in various sexual poses and sends such pictures to others, this will be criminally prosecuted as well. There is not even a living child involved – directly or indirectly – in the creation of any of the purported acts; no real-world victims to protect. It is the image, the idea that becomes criminalized.

In England, it was once regarded as an act of treason to dream of the king’s death. I suspect that if one now dreams illegal or immoral thoughts that, too, will subject the individual to prosecution. “Hate,” a state of mind, is now a criminal offense in our “best of all possible worlds.”

David Karp wrote a dystopian novel, “One,” involving a society in which people not only had to behave according to the will of their rulers, they had to truly believe in the propriety of such authority. Is it only the lack of technology that now prevents the legal/moral absolutists from probing the inner corners of our minds?

The Best of Butler Shaffer