“We all know what we’re talking about in this bill,” Jones said. “Everyone should be able to agree that children should not have access to sexual content. And if you read the bill, that’s all it says. They’re trying to make it into something that it’s not and has not been done in any other state it’s passed in.”

Groups who advocate for LGBTQ+ rights said they are keeping a watchful eye on the bill but believe it would not prevent access to non-explicit content.

In a time when LGBTQ+ Kansans are facing real attacks from the Legislature, Taryn Jones, a lobbyist for Equality Kansas said it is important to avoid creating additional worry for legislation that is unlikely to affect the lives of everyday people.

“We need to be careful not to create more anxiety and more worry for people,” she said. “That’s always our concern when we look at bills like this – making sure we’re being upfront and honest about what the bill does but not fear-mongering to make people worry more than they already are.”

Disagreement on the bill’s meaning

Legal experts and advocates disagree on what the legislation could have in online, LGBTQ-friendly spaces. Some observers of the bill have claimed that a photo of a same-sex couple could be considered pornographic, but others say that’s a misinterpretation of the legislation.

Rep. John Carmichael, a Wichita Democrat who is an attorney, said he voted against the measure for many reasons. Most importantly, because the legislation is written so vaguely the standard for censorship is often subjective.

It’s uncertain what effects the bill could have on freedom of speech, he said.

“Because a statute defining what is harmful to minors is so subject to interpretation, I don’t think you’re ever going to find someone who can say with certainty what is allowed and what is forbidden,” Carmichael said. “You’ll find that one judge who says it’s allowed, another who says it’s forbidden and that it’s a crime, and another who would call it English literature.”

D.C. Hiegert, an attorney who is an LGBTQ+ Fellow at the American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas said that while state statute does include homosexuality in its definition of sexual conduct, the legislation also says any material barred from minors must also meet the legal requirements for obscenity.

...continued

©2024 The Kansas City Star. Visit at kansascity.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.