Freedom of creeps has no place in on-line bill of rights

Originally published: Tuesday, February 13, 1996
Web-posted: Monday, March 10, 1997

nce again, the defenders of free speech are in an uproar because of a new threat to the rights of pornographers, child molesters and other lowlife forms.

The danger to free speech is tucked in the new communications law.

It provides that anyone who goes on the Internet and makes pornography available to children younger than 18 can be hit with 2 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

This has touched off a storm of protests out there in cyberspace.

For those of you who are not familiar with this cutting-edge world, that means they are posting angry messages, blacking out their pages on the World Wide Web, and wearing electronic blue ribbons.

They believe that anti-pornography laws will be the first step to government control of the Internet. And that it will lead to the censoring of all sorts of views, political and otherwise.

That, of course, is the traditional defense of pornographers and other creeps: If they are censored, it's just a matter of time until the rest of us will be censored.

Maybe, but I've never believed it. As far as I can tell, any time the rights of pornographers are threatened, it just makes it more difficult for pornographers to ply their grubby trade.

I have no objection to adults wallowing in the smut of their choice. And there is no shortage of it in our society. It's available to buy or rent in video stores, by mail-order, in book or magazine form, in movie theaters, weird phone services, and on cable TV.

Whether you live in a big city, a small town or on a farm, the porno of your choice is no more than a short walk or a phone call and a credit card number away.

But like most parents, I'd rather not have it made available to kids. Is that unreasonable? We have laws against selling them booze or smokes. So why not pornography? And why not on the Internet?

Because, as these modem-generated protests have demonstrated, the Internet is a bastion of free speech. And a bastion of hypocrisy.

On the Internet, you are free to say just about anything you want about anyone in the whole world. And you can do it without identifying yourself or your motives.

That's the Internet's idea of free speech -- anonymity for creeps and cowardly curs.

Until computers came along, these lowlifes were limited to getting their kicks by dialing a stranger's phone and panting, "Hi, baby, I wanna ..." Or crouching by their window and peering through binoculars, in hopes that they might spot a neighbor using the washroom.

But the Internet has opened a whole new world of creepdom. There is something there for every perverted, deviant taste.

If you check a popular commercial service, such as America Online, you'll find that the most popular chat groups have to do with one form of odd sex or another.

There is even a World Wide Web page that reviews and rates the qualities of male and female whorehouses here and abroad.

For those who believe that children are desirable and attainable sex objects, it's become a second home.

So the solution, some of you say, is simple: Don't let your kids use your home computer. Or prevent them from using it to go on-line.

OK. But what if your kid visits the home of a friend whose parents aren't that attentive?

The fact is, it's not that easy to monitor the activities of bright adolescents. You buy a computer because you don't want them to be left behind in the great rat race of life. Then while you are out earning a living, you are expected to look over their shoulders.

It's not easy for parents. Especially when there are those who are as dedicated to corrupting them as you are to protecting them.

What's really funny about these free-speech protests is that many of the protesters hate the idea of free speech.

Oh, yes, they want the speech rights of child pornographers and molesters protected. But say one critical word about them and they will be demanding that you be muzzled, fired, censored, and banished to the wilderness.

They are the politically correct crowd--howling for the heads of anyone who says anything that offends their identity or agenda.

So they say, we must protect the rights of the child pornographers, the molesters, the drooling dreamers of unspeakable dreams.

But don't you dare say anything bad about me--publicly or privately or I will expose you as -- eek! -- a bigot.

So I predict that the protests will succeed and the anti-child-porn law will be overturned by the courts.

And that my employers will be asked to fire or muzzle me because I said that many of the protesters are hypocritical jerks.

Bet on it.

© 1996 Chicago Tribune