Hi Mike --

>You see how the meaning of your words has changed, right? But that's okay, you're young.

No. And stop bringing that up.

Now, now. No need to get angry, son.

I said first: Accoring to the US Supreme Court, something is only obscence if it is only there to "excite lust" (that means erotic, and I could make it simpler ;-) and lacks political, social, scientific or artistic value. Fwiw.

That doesn't mean that something that is erotic is obscene, but if it lacks any other values it IS obscene

So, which of those values (political, social, scientific, or artistic) is it when your girlfriend drops her robe? Please don't tell me, scientific, okay? <g>

TO THE SUPREME COURT.

You used an "appeal to authority" as your benchmark. This is similar to saying "according to Webster's" and typically conveys the impression that you believe what follows to be true, in particular in cases where it is not immediately refuted. HTH!

Now, even if I find something erotic obscene, does that mean that I even take offense to the obscenity? No.

Who mentioned "offensive"?

Later... Karl