Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rick Santorum Wants to Kill Jobs, Ban Porn
Tripped Media ^ | March 15, 2012 | ryan mcmanus

Posted on 03/21/2012 12:06:50 PM PDT by presidio9

Rick Santorum hasn’t been shy about wanting to return America to its good ol’ Puritan days. Santorum has openly championed against separation of Church and State, homosexuality, contraception, NAFTA, teleprompters, but what has escaped many is his plan to ban pornography.

Santorum has tried to be the candidate that wants to create jobs, yet doing so would actually hurt our economy and significantly demotivate a significant portion of the population.

In 2010, 12% of websites on the internet were pornography related, accounting for $2.84 billion per year online. Worldwide, that number grows to $4.9 billion, meaning that the United States is currently dominating the production and export of pornography. When you factor in traditional outlets, the porn industry generates about $13 billion in revenue. While that number may not sound like a lot when compared to the $4 billion tax break oil companies receive from the government, its comparable to the revenue of some big name companies like Viacom or Texas Instruments.

While it has been said that the porn industry has suffered in the recession, other economies continue to grow. But even in these countries people still need to consume pornography. America, in true fashion of being #1, currently outperforms other producers of porn by a significant amount of money. Unfortunately, a good deal of revenue is lost due to free streaming websites or illegally shared content, much like the film and music industry.

It’s online presence has been so big that ICANN has recently created a top-level domain just for porn sites. This helps combat the growing number of children stumbling across porn online. While many argue that children shouldn’t run free around the internet, parents should take better precautions regulating where they can visit online. Just because many do not take the time to learn about parental controls doesn’t mean that they have the right to be the world’s moral police.

Now, ignore for a moment the morality behind pornography. Knowing that this industry contributes a significant amount of tax revenue, shouldn’t it be allowed to continue? We consistently raise taxes on cigarettes (about $12 per pack in New York) despite its harmful health benefits rather than outright outlaw them. It is ridiculous to think that because pornography clashes with Santorum’s Leave it to Beaver idea of America that we could potentially see such a huge loss in tax revenue. Don’t even get me started on how much tax revenue we’re currently missing out from the estimated $35 billion marijuana cultivation industry (imports from Canada and Mexico put this number closer to $100 billion).

We’re living in a time where people can better find communities that better reflect their personal views on morality. We’re still learning to find the balance between sharing too much and not sharing enough. We may be moving towards a Brave New World-type society but what is more troubling is the potential number of people behind ideas like this without having read Brave New World.

Bottom line, America produces too much profitable pornography to make it illegal. It creates jobs, brings money into our lagging economy and gives hope to anybody who has ever worked as a pizza delivery guy. Moral fiber be damned, we can’t complain about both “morality” and how much money me pay each week for gas or taxes.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: idiotalert; porn; stuckonstuipid
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last

1 posted on 03/21/2012 12:06:54 PM PDT by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: presidio9

If a vice is profitable, then since we need jobs we had better encourage the particular vice.


2 posted on 03/21/2012 12:09:45 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Oh, if he only could ban porn. I’m afraid that’s far beyond the abilities of any one man at this point.


3 posted on 03/21/2012 12:10:26 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
Oh, if he only could ban porn.

There is that whole pesky "Freedom of the Press" issue. My stance is simple - let the market speak on the matter. If people want to spend their money, they will. If there is no interst in this, then economics will cause this industry to fail.

So far, this industry is far from failing - there is no shortage of young men/women willing to "pose" or "act" for a few dollars. Life is full of decisions, sometimes we make wise decisions, and are rewarded for them. Sometimes we make foolish decisions, and we are generally punished for those as well. In the end, neither you nor I get to arbitrate on the actions of others; we are held accountable for the sins we committed.

4 posted on 03/21/2012 12:21:48 PM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Banning porn would be okay.


5 posted on 03/21/2012 12:21:48 PM PDT by DonkeyBonker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
If a vice is profitable, then since we need jobs we had better encourage the particular vice.

This is similiar logic to "We need federal funding for Planned Parenthood (which gets most of its revenues from infanticide) because otherwise women everwhere will lose healthcare."

6 posted on 03/21/2012 12:24:34 PM PDT by presidio9 (catholicscomehome.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

He never said anything about banning porn. He said he would enforce the laws that are the books.

How hard is that to uderstand?


7 posted on 03/21/2012 12:24:52 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DonkeyBonker
Banning porn would be okay.

Aside from this being contrary to the US Constitution (and yes, there was porn back then too); who gets to arbitrate what is, and what isn't "Porn"?

Do we let a group of Parents , who don't know their collective backsides from a jar of jelly, get to decide?

Or, do you suggest we impliment some "Thought Police" who get to determine what people are thinking when they read material, and punish them for their alleged thoughts? We either have a Constitution, or we do not. We either support it, or let's just save some time and aggrivation and burn it - that appears to be what Obama wants to do.


8 posted on 03/21/2012 12:27:59 PM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Just as with abortionists, leftists often look the other way when laws are violated. THIS is what he would crack down upon. Banning porn? Another BIG LIE.


9 posted on 03/21/2012 12:28:16 PM PDT by alstewartfan ( 27 of 36 Romney judicial appointments were DEMOCRATS!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

-—In the end, neither you nor I get to arbitrate on the actions of others;-—

It’s why we have laws.

——we are held accountable for the sins we committed——

In the next life, and in this.

Since pornography is evil, it is permissible to outlaw it, in principle.

Whether it’s practical, is the fundamental question.

It should be restricted, whenever practical.

It destroys marriages, the producers and the participants, among other things.


10 posted on 03/21/2012 12:31:04 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas (Viva Christo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Bottom line, America produces too much profitable pornography to make it illegal. It creates jobs, brings money into our lagging economy and gives hope to anybody who has ever worked as a pizza delivery guy. Moral fiber be damned, we can’t complain about both “morality” and how much money me pay each week for gas or taxes.

 
 
IBTZ


11 posted on 03/21/2012 12:34:32 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

DOOFUS FOR POTUS 2012!


12 posted on 03/21/2012 12:35:33 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DonkeyBonker
Banning porn would be okay.

We've been down this road. Not only would banning porn be unconstitutional and lead to questions about legitmate representations of nudity (Ex: Michelangelo's "David"), but enforcing such a ban would be about as sucessful as outlawing speeding.

13 posted on 03/21/2012 12:36:14 PM PDT by presidio9 (catholicscomehome.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

“Oh, if he only could ban porn. I’m afraid that’s far beyond the abilities of any one man at this point.”

Porn is illegal in Saudi Arabia and Iran, and was illegal in the Soviet Union. Those proscriptions did not make those nations whole or healthy. Hiding symptoms does not effect a cure in diseased cultures.


14 posted on 03/21/2012 12:37:18 PM PDT by Psalm 144 ("I think we ought to listen to Alinsky." - Governor G. Romney, father of Bishop Willard M. Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

So does obesity, smoking, too much salt, and alcohol. We tried to outlaw alcohol, how did that work out? How’s that old war on drugs doing? Have any drug users quit becuase their supply has dried up? How many new drugs have emerged since we started our little ‘war’?

You can’t legislate morality, it simply doesn’t work; and frankly, you shouldn’t try. People will do what people will do. All that happens is that you increase the perceived value of the vice, the profitability of the vice, and the greed precipitates violence against the innocent.

I do agree with you 100% in your statement “enforce the laws”. Generally speaking, if the laws were enforced, there would be no need to create new laws (that are going to be ignored as well).


15 posted on 03/21/2012 12:39:00 PM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

What about prostitution? Think of all the jobs that would be created if that were legal. Anyone against prostitution “Wants to kill jobs”!


16 posted on 03/21/2012 12:40:29 PM PDT by BO Stinkss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
He said he would enforce the laws that are the books.

I only have a few problems with enforcing the laws on the books for banning hardcore pornography (Santorum was specific that it was hardcore and not software pornography that needs to be removed off the web):

1. It would require hiring a lot of federal employees to look at porn and porn websites and determine which crosses the line. Don't we have enough federal employees looking at porn, only now they get to include it in their job description? And how do you keep the sickos from applying for such jobs?

2. How to enforce such a ban - is the government going to finally just come out and turn itself into a giant filter for our internet services (web browsing, email, etc.) or leave it up to ISPs to block.

3. Do we want the federal government dictating directly or through the ISPs, our behavior on the internet?

4. Once the bureaucracy is in place to start determining what is obscene and not obscene, can we be sure that a future administration like Obama's or a liberal Congress won't change the definition of "obscene" to include things like cartoons of Mohammed, which many Muslims view as being worse than pornography and worthy of a death sentence.

5. Since a lot of this is ostensibly to "protect the children", can we be sure that a future administration and Congress won't decide that discussions about things like guns won't be blocked or heavily filtered? After all, all good little liberals know that every gun is just waiting to kill a child.

I fully acknowledge that the laws are on the books already, but once we set up the bureaucracy to start enforcing them, as with all government bureaucracies, it will try and grow in power and budget, and one of the ways it will do that is to try to move the lines on what is obscene to beyond hardcore pornography.

We must always assume that with any new bureaucracies and government powers that are created are enabled, that there will be somebody like Barrack Hussein Obama in the White House at some point in the future, and that there will be people like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi in Congress.
17 posted on 03/21/2012 12:43:10 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

“...let the market speak...”???

“...there is no shortage of young men/women willing to “pose” or “act” for a few dollars.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You know you are advocating for the sexual abuse of minors, don’t you?

Just how many laws do you want to eliminate so that we don’t infringe on the Constitution? So that porn (most of which is child-centric) can flourish?

I know that I’m not supposed to engage in personal attacks, so I’ll leave it to your imagination as to what I think of you and everyone else who defends pornography.


18 posted on 03/21/2012 12:43:33 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I don’t know which is worse. You comparing porn to Michelangelo’s “David”, or you not know that speeding is already outlawed.

Are you really OK with porn being open and made completely legal? No restrictions at all?

After all, the Constitution doesn’t prohibit it, so it must be OK?


19 posted on 03/21/2012 12:48:55 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DonkeyBonker
Only if I'm the one to decide what is/isn't porn.

---

And Japanese tentacle hentai is definitely *NOT* pornographic. It's art!

Urotsukidōji: Legend of the Overfiend is completely fine...

20 posted on 03/21/2012 12:53:17 PM PDT by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
It should be restricted, whenever practical.

I'll give you a practical and conservative solution that you can implement right this minute: Install filters or filtering software on every computer and internet connection you control. If you have children in the house, make sure the computer is visible - don't let them be on the internet in their rooms. Make sure that anywhere they might use the internet, that it's also filtered or make sure they don't use it. Don't buy them iPhones and iPod touches that can access the internet.

They might still be exposed at some point - a lot of us remember growing up and having "that friend" or "that cousin" that got into their dad's porn stash, but we can start taking care of much of the problem right now, without spending tax dollars and without conditioning our kids to the government deciding what they can and cannot look at on the internet.

We can police ourselves and should not be relying on the federal government. With grandkids and grandnieces and nephews running around the house, we took such precautions.
21 posted on 03/21/2012 12:54:09 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I’m merely attempting to reflect contemporary American ethos wherein the gentle flow of cash throughout society trumps all other values. For cash supports the deep current need for eating, drinking, drugging, copulating, evacuating the bowels, snoring and “The Games!”


22 posted on 03/21/2012 12:54:46 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

You can’t legislate morality, it simply doesn’t work; and frankly, you shouldn’t try.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

More liberal BS.

You can legislate morality. The questions is... WHOSE morality are you going to legilstate?

Right now we have a Marxist/Socialist style of morality in place in the White House. A type of morality that is gutting the military with a repeal of DADT and a man whose morals are anti-Christian in all that he does.

“You can’t legislate morality”? Jeez. Wake up. What do you think Obama is doing?


23 posted on 03/21/2012 12:55:06 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
You know you are advocating for the sexual abuse of minors, don’t you?

Sadly, conservatives aren't much different than liberals at this point. If Rick Santorum weren't calling for the enforcement of our pornography laws, the people screaming the loudest now would be screaming that Rick Santorum supports child pornography.
24 posted on 03/21/2012 12:55:51 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Who said anything about ignoring the laws? That is something you are bringing to the table, something I have neither condoned nor suggested. By all means, enforce the laws to the letter of the law; and prosecute offenders to the fullest extent of the law.

Please don’t ‘think’ of some exception (like flagrantly ignoring the law) and then attack me for it. I can’t be held accountable for things you ‘think’. Read what I wrote, ignore the voices in your head.


25 posted on 03/21/2012 1:01:30 PM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
Since pornography is evil, it is permissible to outlaw it, in principle.

With that train of thought, it is very easy to end up with:

Lenina Huxley: Ah, smoking is not good for you, and it's been deemed that anything not good for you is bad; hence, illegal. Alcohol, caffeine, contact sports, meat...
John Spartan: Are you shitting me?
Moral Statute Machine: John Spartan, you are fined one credit for a violation of the Verbal Morality Statute.
John Spartan: What the hell is that?
Moral Statute Machine: John Spartan, you are fined one credit for a violation of the Verbal Morality Statute.
Lenina Huxley: Bad language, chocolate, gasoline, uneducational toys and anything spicy. Abortion is also illegal, but then again so is pregnancy if you don't have a licence.

26 posted on 03/21/2012 1:02:27 PM PDT by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Morally banrupt and...

“While that number may not sound like a lot when compared to the $4 billion tax break oil companies receive from the government,”

Economically ignorant. What an idiot.

That said, banning porn would be futile and only serve to subsidize and further criminalize the industry, making it MORE profitable.


27 posted on 03/21/2012 1:02:35 PM PDT by piytar (Rebellion is here! Free Republic is on the front line! NEVER SURRENDER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
Saw that today in the newspaper. Absolutely incredible painting. That is him in a nutshell. That is what BHO is ALL about. It's his #1 enemy.

I actually had a nightmare a few months ago that the puke won a 2nd term, and on January 20th 2013, him and the Nation of Islam marched into the National archives, broke into the casing using an electric saw, pulled out the original pages of the Constitution, and burned it to a crisp while a crowd outside cried, which is why that painting blows my mind.


28 posted on 03/21/2012 1:04:36 PM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda (All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
“You can’t legislate morality”? Jeez. Wake up. What do you think Obama is doing?

So, your moral compass is influenced by whomever is in the White House? Is that what you are suggesting? Perhaps you ought to look at what Morality means, because I think you are thinking of something else.

Now, I have no problem with anyone suggesting we enforce the laws on the books. I've never, ever (in my entire history on FR) suggested otherwise. I may have suggested some laws be changed, but never have suggested they be ignored. However, when someone wants to ban something - red flags go off in my head. If I am of the mindset to subscribe to the Playboy channel (which I do not, have not, nor have intention of ever doing) - I neither want, need, nor will consider your opinion on that matter. That is my business, and my business alone. Same thing for reading a book, a newspaper, a website/blog like this. For when you get the power to ban something, the thirst for power will corrupt. First it will be porn, then it will be something else - we've seen this over, and over throughout histrory.

29 posted on 03/21/2012 1:08:26 PM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Santorum is finished. The guy self destructed. First the “I don’t care about the unemployment rate” now this “Ban porn” crap?? WTF is THAT? Who the hell cares about freggin’ porn?

The country is at war, we are in massive debt, people are living on scraps, the constitution is being burned alive, and this idiot is focusing on freakin PORN? WHAT?? Larry Flint is this guys #1 concern?

The LAST thing anybody wants to hear about is “banning” between this yasshole Mike Bloomberg in NYC and this foreign born Islamo in the WH. People have had it up to here with liberals and their banning decrees, and this idiot brings it up as well? Who cares what he is banning, he said THE “B” world and flushed his whole campaign down the sewer. He pulled a Gary Hart, subconciously self-destructed his whole campaign. And I say subconciously because I know he isn’t THAT stupid! Or is he? Because if he is, then he shouldn’t be POTUS in the first place. We already got one shoe-size IQ genius in the WH.


30 posted on 03/21/2012 1:18:03 PM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda (All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

I repeat my earlier accusation. You are advocating for the sexual abuse of minors.

Your liberal mindset is the reason why porn, homosexualism, drugs, abortion and other social evils are so rampant in this country.

Yes, I want to ban these things. Because if I take your view and condone them as someone else’s freedoms, then we only need look at recent history to see where this has brought America.

Or do you think that porn for example has not harmed, but has benefitted our country?


31 posted on 03/21/2012 1:18:45 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Maybe Rick Santorum does want to “ban porn.” However, since the President has no power to do so, and it’s unlikely that a “ban” passed by the legislature would stand a challenge, Santorum’s opinion on the subject is irrelevant to anyone who’s not obsessed with porn.

This sentence also applies to the nattering nidjits who are concerned that Santorum wants to “ban contraception.” Grow up and get your brains off your gonads. If you’re willing to have four more years of Marxism because you’re upset that a Republican candidate might *disapprove* of something you can’t live without, then there’s no hope for you.


32 posted on 03/21/2012 1:20:36 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Number-one Son earns Eagle Scout. Family collapses in relief. Where's the wine?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Oh yes, porn stars are hard-working productive Americans. /s


33 posted on 03/21/2012 1:26:00 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The RNC would prefer Obama to a conservative nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
You can’t legislate morality

Please find another way to word your point. This is the common liberal mantra and is just factually incorrect.

Morality definition: how right or wrong something is: the rightness or wrongness of something as judged by accepted moral standards

Not only "can we" legislate morality, we never legislate anything else.

We have laws against murder, theft, rape and extortion because we believe these acts to be wrong.

One can make a logical case that sex and drug practices should not be legislated on moral grounds, but that's different from "you can't legislate morality," which is just not true.

34 posted on 03/21/2012 1:32:22 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

These people screaming about the false claim that Santorum wants to ban porn are playing a liberal game. They know its false but they have an agenda so they’re going to use the claim.

Rush Limbaugh tried to make a point for conservatives in his apology over Sandra Fluke. He warned against becoming like the left but conservatives were so busy with the rage fest that they ignored that part.

America is in deep trouble and it isn’t entirely the fault of liberals.


35 posted on 03/21/2012 1:35:36 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
I don’t know which is worse. You comparing porn to Michelangelo’s “David”,

"The David" is a classic extreme example frequently used in this argument to illustrate the point. As someone who spends too much time in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, I can tell you, for example, that Rodin's female nudes with anatomically correct genitalia DEFINITELY make adults blush. The point is that there is no appropriate line for such a subjective matter of distinction.

or you not know that speeding is already outlawed.

Really? And how's that working out so far?

Are you really OK with porn being open and made completely legal? No restrictions at all?

Actually there already ARE restrictions on porn. Porn involving children for example. And yet even that remains available. Just ask Pete Townshend.

After all, the Constitution doesn’t prohibit it, so it must be OK?

The Founding Fathers gave us a straightforward mechanism for amending the Constitution as necessary. Good luck with that.

36 posted on 03/21/2012 1:40:06 PM PDT by presidio9 (catholicscomehome.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

With Freedom, come certain ills. People will print dirty stories, people will say things you don’t agree with. They can say whatever they want - it’s something we call Freedom. You, do not have to listen.

You see, I believe in the concepts of Freedom and the Constitution - such a dirty liberal creep that I am.

You apparently believe we would all be better living under YOUR rules, where people like YOU get to decide what is good for us. But more importantly, YOU get to also decide what the punishment for any crime is. Golly, where have we heard that before? Name calling, utter disregard for the Constition, demanding that people do what they think is right, then lots of insults and baseless name calling for anyone who dares disagee .... golly, where do we hear that. Seems like there is a GOP war on women, too.

I’m completely comfortable with the concept of Freedom. Freedom includes the right to make stupid decisions, to make unhealthy decisions, and to make decisions YOU don’t agree with.

Perhaps you would be happier in Saudi, Iran, Iraq or Afghanistan. They don’t allow pornography, it is legally banned, as is alcohol and many other things; thus they must be the ideal society, right?

BTW, I think you understanding of History is as flawed as your concept of the Constitution. People came to America to FLEE oppression - which is the anti-thesis of what you are proposing.


37 posted on 03/21/2012 1:41:42 PM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

How old are you?

I’m 53 years old. And have lived in America all my life. And do I have more freedoms now than when I was 25? Than when I was born?

Nope. Of course not. It’s understood that we have fewer freedoms and fewer rights than we did 30-50-75 years ago? Think of the TSA for just one of a thousand examples of our rights being eroded.

Why is this? Is the Constitution still in place? Yes, but it’s more than that. The reason why America is in an economic mess is because we are in a moral mess. You can’t ignore the distinction between the two.

Let’s consider Sodomy Laws for a moment. When I was born - all 50 states has laws on the books outlawing homosexuality.

I ask sarcastically - “Aren’t you glad we wised up and abolished all those moral laws”?

You said.... “You apparently believe we would all be better living under YOUR rules, where people like YOU get to decide what is good for us.”

And I say... “HELL YES!!”

People like me founded this Country. And we had a grasp on it for 200 years. Now, people like me are laughed at and scorned by social liberals like you as you call us Nanny Staters and worse.

“I’m completely comfortable with the concept of Freedom. Freedom includes the right to make stupid decisions, to make unhealthy decisions, and to make decisions YOU don’t agree with.”

Don’t get too comfortable there, FRiend. Your abuse of the freedoms we USED to have in this country are rapidly disappearing. You are that frog in that pot of water - and you don’t even realize it’s reaching that boiling point.

I ask again. How old are you? Do you not even have the capacity to look back even 25 years ago and see how our freedoms are being taken away?

I know you know they are. So what? You blame us SoCons for our nation’s problems?

Jeez.


38 posted on 03/21/2012 1:59:54 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek; Hodar; GrandJediMasterYoda

The voice of reason is being ignored as usual, when it is all about what some people don’t agree with-at that point, they decide that smoking, drinking, sex, texting, whatever should be “banned”. Censorship is censorship-period, and what ever seems to be a good idea to ban now will just bite the witch hunters in the ass later when something they like is banned.

Blatant sex on the internet, drinking, smoking, etc are consenting adult issues, not for those under 18, and let the parents be responsible, like sensible people should be. And no, I don’t care who or what an ADULT drinks, smokes, snorts, fornicates with or looks at on the internet as long as it does not involve kids, or any kind of hard crime-it is NOMFB.

Even out here in the hinterlands, I do not know any parent with a kid under 18 who does not monitor their internet use, gives them an unrestricted cell phone or Ipad, or monitor what they watch on TV. They are simply not allowed to have the same privileges that their parents or other adults do. Most of the kids out here are homeschooled or go to private school anyway, so they are not so exposed to a peer group that insists on being adults at 14 or so.

I’ve been accused by a British acquaintance of being “just a bit right of Attila the Hun”, so I’m not a liberal...


39 posted on 03/21/2012 2:09:52 PM PDT by Texan5 ("You've got to saddle up your boys, you've got to draw a hard line"...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

i’m confused.

you rant about our loss of freedoms during your 53 years, but seem quite ready to take away more of them (porn in this case).


40 posted on 03/21/2012 2:10:42 PM PDT by consultant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

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. Rick Santorum believes that federal obscenity laws should be vigorously enforced.  “If elected President, I will appoint an Attorney General who will do so.”  

The Obama Administration has turned a blind eye to those who wish to preserve our culture from the scourge of pornography and has refused to enforce obscenity laws. While the Obama Department of Justice seems to favor pornographers over children and families, that will change under a Santorum Administration. 

He wants the porn laws on the books enforced. Has he called for new laws?


41 posted on 03/21/2012 2:11:42 PM PDT by Linda Frances (Only God can change a heart, but we can pray for hearts to be changed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Linda Frances

The attorney general has aided and abbetted the traffic of arms to Mexico resulting in the death of federal agents, and is lying about it-why in the name of Jesus would we want them “enforcing” anything at all? Be careful what you wish for...


42 posted on 03/21/2012 2:20:38 PM PDT by Texan5 ("You've got to saddle up your boys, you've got to draw a hard line"...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
People like me founded this Country.

No, quite the opposite. Again, if you knew anything about American History, you would know that the Pilgrims fled tyranny, which is exactly what you are supporting. You have no more rights over me, than I have over you. We elect representatives to create laws, that restrain what we can do - unjust laws are repealed (as in sodomy laws). What my spouse and I do in our bedroom is NOYFB. When we want your approval for our intimate relations, we'll let you know. Until then, mind your own business.

Whereas you seem quite intent in imposing your views upon me; I reject them out of hand - because you are utterly powerless to enforce them. I will read what I wish (whether you approve or not), I will worship as I wish (whether you approve or not) and I will view art, movies, statues or websites without any consideration as to your approval. You see, that very elementry fact is what makes America free.

I would argue that in some instances, we have MORE rights today than we did years ago. With rights comes responsibilities. For example, in the 1950's children were essentially 'chattle' to their parents - Child abuse was protected and the children were told to 'shut up and deal with it'. Now, they have the riht to NOT be beaten.

You do not, will not, and have never had the right to command - anyone - do abide by your will. And as long as America remains free, you never will.

As for age, I'm a grandparent of 10. I remember very well the freedoms that have been won - from the Civil Rights of Blacks to have the same opportunities as anyone else, to the rights of people to marry people they wish (without regard to race). What rights have you lost?

43 posted on 03/21/2012 2:25:14 PM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: consultant
I agree. You ARE confused.

It's all about abusing our freedoms. Do you think that the freedom to engage in pornography has helped or harmed our Nation?

 
I suppose you agree with the idiot author who said...
 

Bottom line, America produces too much profitable pornography to make it illegal. It creates jobs, brings money into our lagging economy and gives hope to anybody who has ever worked as a pizza delivery guy. Moral fiber be damned, we can’t complain about both “morality” and how much money me pay each week for gas or taxes.




44 posted on 03/21/2012 2:30:35 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Rick wants to go after child porn. Covered under existing laws.

Of course, you can argue “That provides jobs!” also.


45 posted on 03/21/2012 2:31:33 PM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

-—You can’t legislate morality, it simply doesn’t work; and frankly, you shouldn’t try.——

All law is based on morality.

If not, what is it based on?

Convention?

Social contract?

The force of will?


46 posted on 03/21/2012 2:33:27 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas (Viva Christo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: redgolum
Rick wants to go after child porn. Covered under existing laws.

Repeating a lie till it becomes the truth. That's a liberal tactic and the fact that "conservatives" have adopted it proves that America is finished.
47 posted on 03/21/2012 2:43:55 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

As I said... you are that frog in that pot. You think we have MORE rights?

You must be delusional. You happily condemn me for my morality yet condone gays for their immorality as you say “What my spouse and I do in our bedroom is NOYFB. When we want your approval for our intimate relations, we’ll let you know. Until then, mind your own business.”

I used to have a tagline that pssed off the liberals like you:

“Yes, as a matter of fact, what you do in the privacy of your own bedroom IS my business.”

I have repeatedly made the point that America is worse now economically, morally and socially than we were 25-50 years ago. You disagree.

I see the water in the pot is getting hotter and hotter. You think things are fine.


48 posted on 03/21/2012 2:49:16 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Texan5
The attorney general has aided and abbetted the traffic of arms to Mexico resulting in the death of federal agents, and is lying about it-why in the name of Jesus would we want them “enforcing” anything at all? Be careful what you wish for...


So don't enforce child porn? Heck, if we have a bad AG why enforce any laws? Is that what you want? Did you see the thread earlier where a man had pictures 2 year old, boys and girls.....God help us. I cried when I seen it. So you would say he should not have been arrested to protect your rights? We have a bad AG after all.

Just how bad do things have to get to see our country is in trouble? You laugh and joke and take lightly issues that are corrupting and destroying our kids. You can't be a parent, to not worry about all that is going on. The left has made this country sex obsessed.

49 posted on 03/21/2012 2:55:20 PM PDT by Linda Frances (Only God can change a heart, but we can pray for hearts to be changed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Our founders warned that the fall of our morals would be quickly followed by the fall of the nation.

I think they would be astounded that we’ve lasted this long.


50 posted on 03/21/2012 3:29:35 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson