Valley Rep. Mann's Orwellian measure ...

Valley Rep. Mann's Orwellian measure likely will be enacted

There are 56 comments on the The Morning Call story from Mar 22, 2009, titled Valley Rep. Mann's Orwellian measure likely will be enacted. In it, The Morning Call reports that:

''It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen,'' begins George Orwell's ''Nineteen Eighty-Four.'' And it was Winston Smith, not you, who'd soon run afoul of the Thought Police.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Morning Call.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
OVER PAID KNUCKLEHEADS

Catawissa, PA

#1 Mar 22, 2009
THE MORNING CALL IS ORWELLIAN.

paul carpenter and his carpetbaggers from los angeles come to pa to brainwash the hicks to love illegal aliens...especially since morning call fired a lot of gringos and replaced them with latinos.

YOU WILL LOVE ILLEGAL ALIENS....OR ELSE!

paul carpenter, have you no sense of decency, at long last?!
snowman allentown PA

Sellersville, PA

#2 Mar 22, 2009
And has anyone read her thoughts lately,that she is frustrated with no idea of what she is starting here? I am against kiddie porn and definitelt I think sex deviates of anyone under 18 should be put to death, but this bill will have anyone who smiles at a child thrown in jail. She is a nut and must be brought down. But remember, in her world she is one of those more equal than you or me.
Amy B

Saylorsburg, PA

#3 Mar 22, 2009
I am not fond of this columnist but I have to agree with him.
There are online ads (as with TV) showing little kids in certain poses that could be taken as sexy. A diaper or clothing ad for example. I DONT have any nasty thoughts about the child nor would my husband. According to this bill, if those ads came up on our computer, we would be "sexual deviants?
I dont think Mann is the sharpest tool in the shed
Staberdearth

Allentown, PA

#4 Mar 22, 2009
Amy B wrote:
I dont think Mann is the sharpest tool in the shed
I have come to that conclusion but as a result Mann's body of work, not just this issue.

Why does she keep getting elected?
Its Good Law

Whitehall, PA

#5 Mar 22, 2009
Carpenter .... did you not know that we are now in the era of Obama. Government does KNOW best. Ms. Mann is doing the right thing. More thought/intent laws are needed at all levels of government. It is time. People have been left to do too much on their own and look at the MESS we are in. Failing Economy, unsustainable wars, a gross dependency on oil, etc. etc. etc... It is time for change and better laws for the good of this country.
Harry Swartz

AOL

#6 Mar 22, 2009
Under 18, some of these kids start blooming in grade school. Forget the book look at what some of these kids are doing.
mclarenm8b

Allentown, PA

#7 Mar 22, 2009
Assuming Mr. Carpenter is correct on all the details, this is VERY scary stuff. What Ms. Mann has proposed here is literally thought control. In essence, if you are accused of viewing a state prohibited photo, the state will determine your "state of mind" when you viewed said prohibited material. I mean this is quite amazing...the state will ultimately decide what you were thinking at the time!
Where does it stop?? The next logical step would be to restrict thoughts of smoking. If the "state" feels you were simply thinking about the pleasures of smoking, you might be in big trouble. You see, it's not enough that you quit smoking. Your thoughts and desires now belong to "the state".
But hey, it's one or two less things you need to worry about pondering. Look at all the things the state of PA takes care of for you...the things you just don't have to think about...
Gee, where should I buy my wine today?...Oh, that's right, the state decided that for me.
Where should I smoke my cigarette?...Oh, that's right, the state decided that for me.
Gee,should I allow smoking in my new restaurant?...Oh, that's right, the state decided that for me.
Here I am surfing the internet and all of a sudden a photo of a young girl appears on my screen suggesting something sexually provacative...oh my, should I look? What am I thinking at this very moment?...Are my thoughts illegal?...Oh, that's right, "the state" will determine what I was thinking at this very moment.
Whew, it's good we have "the state" to take care of these pesky little things for us.
jones

AOL

#8 Mar 22, 2009
The more State and Federal Government get into your lives the closer we get to revolution. You own 80% of AIG and look what Geithner, Frank and Dodd have done with your money ? Assisted living takes on a whole new meaning for these scum . Thats only a start ,there's more than only three involved in the mess.
Bertha Butt

Allentown, PA

#9 Mar 22, 2009
Sweet Jennifer WILL NOT get my vote this time! She is dead weight, more of the same, pompous, with a holier than thou attitude.
Clem Cadiddlehopper

AOL

#10 Mar 22, 2009
What does Obama have to do with this? Jennifer is dead wrong on this issue. Her heart might be in the right place, but her head is not. She must not realize the slippery slope that she will begin us down, with this legislation. For that fact alone, Jennifer should not be returned to the State Legislature, in the next election.
I am a Democrat by registration, but this is a matter of right, not party.
OVER PAID KNUCKLEHEADS

Catawissa, PA

#11 Mar 22, 2009
the good old days of the 1970s...12? year old brook shields in penthouse magazine (no joke), and 14? year old linda blair in the exorcist, shoving her mom's face into her menstrating crotch, with a "f me beitch", with her mom's face all bloody from it.(and brook losing her virginity to a john in Pretty Baby.)

yeah, paul, bring back the 1970s.
supporter

Bethlehem, PA

#12 Mar 22, 2009
I'm with Jenn on this one.

She is a caring public servant who is working for the protection of children against the creeps in our society.

Go get 'em, Jenn.
Sickening

Kulpsville, PA

#13 Mar 22, 2009
OVER PAID KNUCKLEHEADS wrote:
the good old days of the 1970s...12? year old brook shields in penthouse magazine (no joke), and 14? year old linda blair in the exorcist, shoving her mom's face into her menstrating crotch, with a "f me beitch", with her mom's face all bloody from it.(and brook losing her virginity to a john in Pretty Baby.)
yeah, paul, bring back the 1970s.
I hope you aren't serious about MOST of your comments? If you are, educate yourself.
What worries me is, as an adult who on occasion views pornography on the web, i see photos of girls who look younger than 18-17. I quickly go back to the previous page to get off the site. But now do i have to worry someone thinks i purposely clicked on it? Now if the site said, "young teens" or something, then i couldn't argue. But i avoid anything like that. But i worry.
Grandma

Allentown, PA

#14 Mar 22, 2009
This is definitely over the line. Thought police. That should scare any American. What is equally scary is the series on TV about little kids and beauty contests. Mom's pimping out little kids. Give me a break. A pedophile does not need to go to the computer for his fix. It is right there on prime time tv.
OVER PAID KNUCKLEHEADS

Catawissa, PA

#15 Mar 22, 2009
Sickening wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope you aren't serious about MOST of your comments? If you are, educate yourself.

What worries me is, as an adult who on occasion views pornography on the web, i see photos of girls who look younger than 18-17. I quickly go back to the previous page to get off the site. But now do i have to worry someone thinks i purposely clicked on it? Now if the site said, "young teens" or something, then i couldn't argue. But i avoid anything like that. But i worry.
YOU educate yourself...one of the biggest fight in politics was over child porn...with the aclu, of course, being big believers that once such porn is out there it should never be censored....it took YEARS to outlaw child porn----what should have been a very simple law.

i forgot CHESTER THE MOLESTER....1970s hustler had "funny" cartoon of a child molester. of course, hollywood made larry flynt into a hero.

eric clapton 1970s supergroup BLIND FAITH had 14? year old TOPLESS on cover of their lp.

how quickly people forget how child porn was once perfectly legal...that's orwellian..."he who controls the past, controls the future."
Losers

Allentown, PA

#16 Mar 22, 2009
I would love to see what Paul Carpenter downloads on a given day...
Obamination

Allentown, PA

#17 Mar 22, 2009
This may be the first time I agree with Carpenter.
kooper

Newton, NJ

#18 Mar 22, 2009
This is a very dangerous and slippery step onto a downward slope that can lead to the erosion of civil liberties. I see this as tool for those that have opposed Mann from the start. As a Dem. I have never voted for Mann as I see her as nothing more than a bobble head, incapable of developing one bright idea that she can call her own. I should hope that the people will speak to their concern of civil liberties. More than one persons life has been ruined because of accusations that have been later proved to be false. Imagine the room once this law passed.

I've never agreed with Carpenter...I must say that on this issue, I do.
republicans are stupid

Philadelphia, PA

#19 Mar 22, 2009
This is a misplaced discussion.Intent is not that big a problem. I'm sure some case law will eventually decide what intent means, it's part of many criminal laws. For example if you shoot someone in the head it is reasonable to assume that the shooter intended to inflict grave bodily harm or to even intended to kill the victim. You infer intent from the circumstances. One 17 yr old in a sexy pose in your computer buffer isn't going to do it while having 50 pics of a 3 yr old being molested on a storage drive certainly would fit the bill. I'm more concerned with lumping a 17 yr old with fake papers in Sweden posing for money along with a 5yr old being molested by some twisted pedophile as both being kiddie porn. Given what teenagers do today I can't see the big deal with the Sweedish 17 yr old voluntarily making a few bucks as a model while the pedophile who molests the todler should be boiled in oil after slow torture.
Harry da Hat

Allentown, PA

#20 Mar 22, 2009
Clem Cadiddlehopper wrote:
What does Obama have to do with this? Jennifer is dead wrong on this issue. Her heart might be in the right place, but her head is not. She must not realize the slippery slope that she will begin us down, with this legislation. For that fact alone, Jennifer should not be returned to the State Legislature, in the next election.
I am a Democrat by registration, but this is a matter of right, not party.
Agree, agree, agree! Mann is over her head and should get her lunch pail cleaned and ready. Or get back in the kitchen. Maybe Louie Belleterie will hire her to squeeze tomatoes. Democrat yes, Mann-NO!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Eighty Four Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
dollar general Jul '15 Family dollar str... 2
Bobs bar and Roys by the tracks Jul '15 vern 1
Johnda Moore May '15 Angel 2
Review: Black And Gold Towing, LLC (Jan '15) May '15 Ips 3
Doctors in area for weight loss May '15 Justme 1
News Chiropractor likes small-town setting for practice (Jan '15) Feb '15 Chiropractor From... 6
John Preston (Feb '15) Feb '15 Sunshine19 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Eighty Four Mortgages