<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Shell Shocked: Some U.S. Gas Stations Lift Ban On Porn</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frcblog.com/2007/04/shell-shocked-some-us-gas-stations-lift-ban-on-porn/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frcblog.com/2007/04/shell-shocked-some-us-gas-stations-lift-ban-on-porn/</link>
	<description>The Blog of Family Research Council</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 06:28:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Suricou Raven</title>
		<link>http://www.frcblog.com/2007/04/shell-shocked-some-us-gas-stations-lift-ban-on-porn/comment-page-1/#comment-375</link>
		<dc:creator>Suricou Raven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2007 14:23:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=251#comment-375</guid>
		<description>And where, exactly, should this line be drawn? Remember that in some places it is considered obscene to show women without their faces covered. Even in the US, many early works on contraception were banned as &#039;obscene&#039; because they dared to even mention sexual anatomy.

And Playboy... very soft porn. Ive never actually bought one myself, but im going on what ive heard, but as far as I know the US version never shows any exposed genital region. Mostly just topless women in suggestive poses. Hah, if I wanted that, I could buy The Sun* newspaper, and look at the Page 3 photo.

The rule says stations cant “sell or display materials with sex [or] nudity.” Playboy has neither. It has partial nudity, thats all.

* For those outside the UK, its perhaps the most popular newspaper in the country, and a great example of the gutter-press tabloid subsituting scandle, celebrity and speculation for news.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And where, exactly, should this line be drawn? Remember that in some places it is considered obscene to show women without their faces covered. Even in the US, many early works on contraception were banned as &#8216;obscene&#8217; because they dared to even mention sexual anatomy.</p>
<p>And Playboy&#8230; very soft porn. Ive never actually bought one myself, but im going on what ive heard, but as far as I know the US version never shows any exposed genital region. Mostly just topless women in suggestive poses. Hah, if I wanted that, I could buy The Sun* newspaper, and look at the Page 3 photo.</p>
<p>The rule says stations cant “sell or display materials with sex [or] nudity.” Playboy has neither. It has partial nudity, thats all.</p>
<p>* For those outside the UK, its perhaps the most popular newspaper in the country, and a great example of the gutter-press tabloid subsituting scandle, celebrity and speculation for news.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

