tangled
10-01-2006, 11:16 AM
I know im a new poster to this forum, but I have read most of the posts in this section concerning this issue and i think there is an idea worth considering.
I think the big poker sites should push the position that congress is violating our 1st ammendment rights to free expression in passing this legislation. I know that this has been brought up before by others, and I know that Mr K and others assure us that this tact would fail in the courts BUT:
There is more than one court in this country. There is- as they say -the court of public opinion. The big poker sites would gain a lot by aggressively pursuing this line even if 10 years from now they would ultimately lose in legal court. The first thing they should do is find players from the US playing at their sites who are sympathetic people-- who work hard for a living otherwise and use Party Poker to blow off steam. Then they should "take up their cause" in fighting for their right to express themselves by playing poker in the privacy of their own home. They could argue that if someone has the 1st ammendment right to watch a person ,for money, except anal sex from 10 different people ,then certainly a caring Nurse from Idaho has the right to relax at a theraputic poker table in her own home. Again, these arguments might fail in court, but that doesnt matter. Making the argument is whats important.
The advantages to this are :
First of all they would gain the boldness of indignation that goes with fighting for a worthy cause. "Yes" -they would say_,"we are violating US law but as the brave freedom fighters from the sixties have said-- an unjust law is no law at all"
Secondly, it would allow the sites to embarrass congress by playing off the idea that this is no longer,fully, the land of the free, but instead a type of theocracy like ones that we are opposed to in the middle east, although to a much lesser degree. It would also highlight the political motvies that pushed this law through so unexpectedly.
Next it would give the US players something to hang their hats on if they want to play online poker, but dont want to go against the government. "WE SHAL OVERCOME". Everybody loves to be part of a cause.
Lastly, it would add one more jungle of munutia to this war of attrition we should be fighting against congress on this issue. Does the government really want to spend a great deal of energy fighting this--fighting against the perceived rights of their own citizens?. And once they let something slide, like little kids with spineless parents, we all will come bursting through.
I know I wasnt eloquent in making my case for why this is a basic human rights issue, but I know some smart lawyer could. And once we have the words behind us we have the cause and the chance to win this eventually.
PEACE MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS
AGITATE, AGITATE, AGITATE.
WE SHALL OVERCOME!!
I think the big poker sites should push the position that congress is violating our 1st ammendment rights to free expression in passing this legislation. I know that this has been brought up before by others, and I know that Mr K and others assure us that this tact would fail in the courts BUT:
There is more than one court in this country. There is- as they say -the court of public opinion. The big poker sites would gain a lot by aggressively pursuing this line even if 10 years from now they would ultimately lose in legal court. The first thing they should do is find players from the US playing at their sites who are sympathetic people-- who work hard for a living otherwise and use Party Poker to blow off steam. Then they should "take up their cause" in fighting for their right to express themselves by playing poker in the privacy of their own home. They could argue that if someone has the 1st ammendment right to watch a person ,for money, except anal sex from 10 different people ,then certainly a caring Nurse from Idaho has the right to relax at a theraputic poker table in her own home. Again, these arguments might fail in court, but that doesnt matter. Making the argument is whats important.
The advantages to this are :
First of all they would gain the boldness of indignation that goes with fighting for a worthy cause. "Yes" -they would say_,"we are violating US law but as the brave freedom fighters from the sixties have said-- an unjust law is no law at all"
Secondly, it would allow the sites to embarrass congress by playing off the idea that this is no longer,fully, the land of the free, but instead a type of theocracy like ones that we are opposed to in the middle east, although to a much lesser degree. It would also highlight the political motvies that pushed this law through so unexpectedly.
Next it would give the US players something to hang their hats on if they want to play online poker, but dont want to go against the government. "WE SHAL OVERCOME". Everybody loves to be part of a cause.
Lastly, it would add one more jungle of munutia to this war of attrition we should be fighting against congress on this issue. Does the government really want to spend a great deal of energy fighting this--fighting against the perceived rights of their own citizens?. And once they let something slide, like little kids with spineless parents, we all will come bursting through.
I know I wasnt eloquent in making my case for why this is a basic human rights issue, but I know some smart lawyer could. And once we have the words behind us we have the cause and the chance to win this eventually.
PEACE MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS
AGITATE, AGITATE, AGITATE.
WE SHALL OVERCOME!!