Rick Santorum Wants to Kill Jobs, Ban Porn

Tripped Media ^ | March 15, 2012 | ryan mcmanus

[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.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

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

[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.

[Hodar]

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.

[DonkeyBonker]

Banning porn would be okay.

[presidio9]

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."

[GeronL]

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

How hard is that to uderstand?

[Hodar]

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.

[alstewartfan]

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.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

-—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.

[Responsibility2nd]

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

[Revolting cat!]

DOOFUS FOR POTUS 2012!

[presidio9]

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.

[Psalm 144]

“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.

[Hodar]

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).

[BO Stinkss]

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

[af_vet_rr]

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.

[Responsibility2nd]

“...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.

[Responsibility2nd]

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?

[gogogodzilla]

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...