http://www.rarefilmfinder.com/showfilm.php?id=16782
Not sure about this one, but at least i found it
I didn't go quite that far but I did need to Google it & I'm English!idler wrote:Jesus! Had to consult "Webster's" to get the meaning of "prurient"
Yep.......that's me!a. having indecent desires; lascivious; curious about lewd subjects. prurience, n.
lol... Sorry about that; I've just grown up with that word being used in church a lot as all my pastor's seemed to toss it out in sermons when railing against subjects of interest to me..idler wrote:Jesus! Had to consult "Webster's" to get the meaning of "prurient", Babelfish didn't translate it. And I thought my English to be quite fluent...
loverboy wrote:Yep.......that's me!google wrote:a. having indecent desires; lascivious; curious about lewd subjects. prurience, n.![]()
![]()
This is still the standard courts use to decide whether something is illegal, though the courts struggle with what "contemporary community standards" are in the age of the Internet. The federal government sometimes chooses to bring obscenity charges in a very conservative Bible-thumping state where they can find jurors who will declare pretty much anything obscene.Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote:The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Guess (b) is related to the transcript of the White House tapes - but I'm sure Richard Milhous Nixon never used "prurient"...Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote:The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.