Skip to comments.Santorum Says He Would Enforce US Obscenity Laws That Obama Ignores
Posted on 03/16/2012 10:56:03 PM PDT by Steelfish
click here to read article
>>Porn kings contribute to liberal causes and liberal politicians turn a blind eye to criminal obscenity.<<
Frankly, in the scheme of things on a scale from 1 (least important) to 10 (metaphysical importance), porn rates a .0005
Pornography is an issue to be concerned about. However, it does NOT belong in a presidential campaign.
It’s an issue that many people, not just men, but some women, have struggles with. But, does it rise to the level of a presidential campaign issue? No.
Major issue of the day!
Does it rise to the level of government involvement?
Santorum would be a disaster as the nominee. (as would the other two)
Agree with you 100 per cent.
“illegal” pornography probably refers to kiddie porn.
Libertarians think its just art.
Molesting kids on camera is not something for government to stop?
Always amazing how many Freepers have no problem with kiddie porn
I think kiddie porn is already a federal crime that is heavily policed..as it should be.
Oh I forgot about all those intrusive bills he has already authored, and some he just thinks he can author to “save” all us sinners.
By the way, maybe he and Karen should consider all the time they are spending away from their precious daughter. I don't mean that in a harsh way, so lay off you next ugly post. I just think if Bella is truly living on borrowed time, God would want him not to waste one minute away from her, especially on a political run. Time is so precious, it gets away from all of us. Rick and Karen are spending a great deal of time away from that sweet baby, and I just keep asking myself if it is worth it.
Politics is not worth wasting the time they could be spending with that precious child. GOD bless Bella and her family. I have her in my prayers daily. I also think Bella is just about the sweetest name I have ever heard. I wish I would of thought of that name when I had my daughter.
What the hell are you talking about?
I think many Democrats would disagree with you. They think it is very important to have an issue like this to use against Republicans. "The Religious Right wants the government to search your computer for porn!" will make a great get-out-the-vote message.
You need to get your mind out of the gutter.
Sadly, politics is religion to politicians.
If Santorum is the candidate, the election will be about his SERP.
2012 has got to be about Obama! the economy, STUPID! and not about morals!
I read the First literally!
To GeronL: Name them, please.
List the FReepers, by screen name, who have said, "I have no problem with kiddie porn". And who are not obvious DU trolls.
Not just FReepers whose beliefs you differ with, and therefore you wish to slur with such horrific accusations. Just list the ones who state they "have no problem with kiddie porn". FReepers are not shy. If such a person exists on FR, they will say so.
Surely you are aware that child pornography is already wildly illegal. And that therefore such a FReeper, if they exist, is advocating doing something wildly illegal on a conservative forum? If such a person exists on FR, they should be run out on a rail forthwith. Flush 'em out and I'm sure the Admin Mods will be all too happy to ban them.
So yes, please list these "many FReepers", whose numbers are so large they "amaze" you.
Newt is UNELECTABLE. He has baggage heavy enough to sink the QEII; Check his negatives, gender gap, independents desert him in droves, and his so-called “southern strategy” went up in smoke after AL and MS. He was unable to pull 50% in his own home state after massive ad buys and campaigning. What now but to withdraw in grace. It’s not just “The Jobs Stupid” its also “the Culture Stupid.”
Santorum made himself provincial and part of the nanny state with his anti-porn crusade. It might have helped if he were running for Pope.
Kiddie porn should be about victimizing specific children to make porn. That should be a capital (or at least a castrating) offense.
However, unless the defendant actually did that, it should not be a criminal matter.
Funny how you were the 1st and only one to suddenly bring up kiddie porn.
Clearly, Santorum is not talking about child pornography. Here's what Santorum said:
"Current federal 'obscenity' laws prohibit distribution of hardcore (obscene) pornography on the Internet, on cable/satellite TV, on hotel/motel TV, in retail shops and through the mail or by common carrier," it reads. "Rick Santorum believes that federal obscenity laws should be vigorously enforced."
The article goes on to say that the FBI has announced 38 convictions on child pornography counts this month. Since Santorum says that Obama isn't enforcing the law, the child pornography laws aren't the laws he's talking about.
Santorum wants the federal government to regulate the "mainstream" kind of pornography.
LOL, you said in one sentence what it took me a dozen above (post #20). Well done!
From April, 2011....and OMG, It’s MSNBC....
Obama’s Porn Problem With Liberals
“If you know where to search, it doesn’t take much Googling to find photos of women having sex with farm animals, videos that graphically depict simulated rape, or actresses made to look 13 year olds performing sex acts on adult men....
....But this week, news broke that the Obama administration had quietly shuttered the only Justice Department unit that exclusively fought adult obscenity.....
....Earlier this month, 42 senators signed a letter urging Attorney General Eric Holder to step up enforcement of federal obscenity laws. Among the cast of mostly Republican signers, one name stood out: Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a staunch liberal from California, the de-facto porn capital of America.....
....She wasn’t alone: five other Senate Democrats, including Minnesota’s left-wing warrior, Amy Klobuchar, also signed the letter, and they were applauded by feminists, leftist lawyers, and liberal academics. Together, this increasingly vocal segment of progressives is making the case that hardcore porn flies in the face of cherished liberal causes-and that Democrats should be leading the charge to take down its distributors......”
If we can't have Newt, I'd settle for Dr. Paul. Or even Mittens! Anybody to oust Obama! Because Obama is who it will be if we nominate Ricky "JFK turns my stomach" Santorum. On the
so-called religious issue, Santorum is a moron!!
Forming a Religious Police.
Actually, it appears he's trying to make anything he doesn't approve of, fit under the broad category of "obscene" or "hard-core", so that he can make it illegal. He wants to enforce the laws dealing with illegal porn in such a way as to include the stuff that is NOT currently illegal, but which he thinks SHOULD be.
That's very different from simply enforcing existing laws.
> Anybody who is against what Santorum said is against enforcing the law.
Ummm, I do not agree. I'm all for enforcing the existing laws, as they are generally understood in the communities where they exist.
I am NOT for letting one bluenose decide what's legal for the entire country, especially when it's quite clear that the vast majority of Americans do not share his self-righteous attitude towards such material.
Obscenity already has a well established legal definition. Obama hasn’t enforced federal obscenity laws but Rick Santorum will.
Personally, I think porn is gross. But, amazingly, I have very little problem avoiding it. If this is about kids not viewing porn, I totally get that. That should be parental control...not coming from a governmental level.
However pure Senator Santorum’s statements might be...the media will seize on such statements and turn them against him. He might want to stick to the issues of our economy and world strife. Plenty of topics there. But he seems to let the media define his platform.
“Newt is UNELECTABLE. He has baggage heavy enough to sink the QEII; Check his negatives, gender gap, independents desert him in droves, and his so-called southern strategy went up in smoke after AL and MS. He was unable to pull 50% in his own home state after massive ad buys and campaigning. What now but to withdraw in grace. Its not just The Jobs Stupid its also the Culture Stupid.”
My, you really hate Newt, don’t you?
Can you please, name one? I am with FR for some time, and never noticed what you mentioned.
Link didn’t work, sorry. It was for the Kinks “Shepards of the Nation”.
He sure comes up with some off the wall issues.
Certainly after election this could be looked into, but it isn’t something to run on.
Head on or inserted in a painful place? Either works for me.
Personally, like you, I enjoy admiring the female form in various states of undress - prefer some clothing as I am a big fan of keeping the mystery going. Watching someone having sex though is a waste of my time - far better to go off and bother the wife.
Having said that though, I got no huge problem with people looking at porn. Their souls, their choice. Not something that is vital for the President to deal with. Heck, you can hardly watch a movie now without the obligatory and fairly graphic sex scene cropping up.
One thing surprised me. There is a thing called ethical porn (had to research it for an article). Reading that term, talk about a mental disconnect! Took me a day or so to even process the idea that porn can be ethical.
LOL. Or, maybe he is still searching FR to try to prove the impossible.
It is obvious, pornography has a death grip on many of the commenters of this post, too. And, I do mean death grip, both physically and spiritually. Why else would anyone deny that this is a most important issue.
We have laws for a reason and we have reason to have much more stringent enforcement of the laws relating to and governing the legality of pornography/obscenity. The very future of our nation and even the world rides on being moral and protecting life.
Morality in this nation is at the bottom of the scale. It really is disappointing to see how many people ignore the intent of pornography and the destruction it causes.
(1) Even “soft” porn is harmful to everyone.
(2) All pornography desensitizes the viewer.
(3) Pornography is addictive.
(4) Pornography degrades marriages.
(5) Pornography increases crime in dangerous offenders.
(6) Pornography encourages and facilitates other crimes.
Reference. These impacts are also listed in The Hill-Link Minority Report of the Presidential Commission on Obscenity and Pornography. A copy of this report, written in 1970, may be ordered from Morality in Media, 475 Riverside Drive, New York, New York 10115.
Pornography Directly Promotes Other Crimes.
The above section shows beyond the faintest shadow of a doubt that pornography users routinely engage in a wide range of violent and sadistic crimes, committed not only against themselves, but against other persons as well.
The pornography pushers also promote child molestation by trivializing sex acts between adults and children and by purposely blurring the line between adult sex and adults having sex with children.
Organizations such as the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) and the Rene Guyon Society, both of which lobby for the elimination of age-of-consent laws, are involved heavily with the homosexual movement and with hard-core pornography.
For more details on the connection of child molestation to pornography and homosexuality, see Chapter 137, “Pornography and Child Molestation.”
However, it is also an established fact that porn kings use their great wealth and influence to directly promote illegal acts in their magazines, including the use of dangerous drugs. This is in keeping with their hedonistic, “anything goes” philosophy.
According to Dr. Judith Reisman, the president of Washington's Institute for Media Education, the legalization of all types of drug use has been a primary financial, editorial, and legislative goal of the Playboy empire since 1966. The first indication that Playboy was going to champion drug use and legalization was in its September 1966 issue, when it interviewed Timothy Leary in a very ingratiating manner.
In 1970, the Playboy Foundation formally underwrote attorney Keith Stroup’s establishment of the National Organization for the Repeal of Marijuana Laws (NORML). In late 1971, the Foundation contributed $100,000, the first of many large periodic grants, to NORML for its 1972 pro-drug campaign.
Playboy has continued to infuse massive editorial and financial assistance to drug legalization since 1970. In 1973 and 1975, Playboy-backed NORML efforts resulted in the decriminalization of marijuana in Oregon and Alaska respectively. Playboy Magazine has published fictional stories lionizing drug-using heros, has printed drug-use charts, and has served as a platform for numerous pro-drug spokesmen, from Timothy Leary to All-American defensive back Don Rogers (who later died of a drug overdose).
According to Congressional sources, illegal drugs are a $70 billion a year business. We now have 20 million people who use marijuana frequently, 7 million who use cocaine frequently, and half a million heroin addicts. Our society is literally drowning in a flood of drugs, and no child is safe from drugs and molestation especially yours!
The very last thing we need is a group of rich lechers egging the drug pushers on with illogical rhetoric in their glossy, expensive magazines.
PRO LIFE ENCYCLOPEDIA CHAPTER 134
Yep, Rick's easy to sidetrack - just bring up a subject dealing with morality and/or Religion and he swallows the hook and all. I prefer a devout Christian as a leader, but he has to be able look at things with the prism of what's first on the importance scale. To Rick, this probably is important.
We have federal pornography laws? I thought they were State and local.
Great, another self-appointed regulator of the internet. What could go wrong?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.