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.

[af_vet_rr]

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.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

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!”

[Responsibility2nd]

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?

[cripplecreek]

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.

[Hodar]

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.

[gogogodzilla]

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.

[piytar]

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.

[GrandJediMasterYoda]

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.

[Hodar]

“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.

[GrandJediMasterYoda]

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.

[Responsibility2nd]

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?

[Tax-chick]

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.

[Carry_Okie]

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

[Sherman Logan]

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.

[cripplecreek]

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.

[presidio9]

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.

[Hodar]

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.

[Responsibility2nd]

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.

[Texan5]

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...

[consultant]

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).