Vigorous’ Santorum crackdown may catch Internet porn viewers

The Daily Call ^

[timlot]

Internet pornography could conceivably become a thing of the past if Rick Santorum is elected president.

The unapologetic social conservative, currently in second place behind Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination, has promised to crack down on the distribution of pornography if elected.

[Mad Dawgg]

I am willing to bet this is Agitprop by the left. Cause if it isn't Santorum is the dumbest guy ever to run for POTUS even when considering AL Gore Ran for POTUS.

[Mariner]

Santorum augments his Church Lady cred.

[manc]

for crying out loud, the law is the law, if you do not like a law you try to get it overturned.

Want more pennies then change the law, want more porn change the law , we’re trying to get rid of Govt health care see the difference

[Utmost Certainty]

Asking for a consistent definition of what’s considered ‘obscene’, is hardly using the language of the Left. I think it’s patently unreasonable to leave it as such an open-ended question. If left open-ended, then next thing you know, criticisms of Islam will be considered ‘obscene’.

If local communities want to arrive at a consensus about what’s obscene and what isn’t, that’s up to them. But this should absolutely not be the jurisdiction of the Federal Government to dictate for 300+ million people.

[Utmost Certainty]

Unfortunately, it isn’t Agitprop: http://www.ricksantorum.com/enforcing-laws-against-illegal-pornography

[onyx]

Santorum's Facebook

America is suffering a pandemic of harm from pornography. A wealth of research is now available demonstrating that pornography causes profound brain changes in both children and adults, resulting in widespread negative consequences. Addiction to pornography is now common for adults and even for some children. The average age of first exposure to hard-core, Internet pornography is now 11. Pornography is toxic to marriages and relationships. It contributes to misogyny and violence against women. It is a contributing factor to prostitution and sex trafficking.

Every family must now be concerned about the harm from pornography. As a parent, I am concerned about the widespread distribution of illegal obscene pornography and its profound effects on our culture.

For many decades, the American public has actively petitioned the United States Congress for laws prohibiting distribution of hard-core adult pornography.

Congress has responded. 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.

I proudly support the efforts of the War on Illegal Pornography Coalition that has tirelessly fought to get federal obscenity laws enforced. That coalition is composed of 120 national, state, and local groups, including Morality in Media, Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, American Family Association, Cornerstone Family Council of New Hampshire, Pennsylvania Family Institute, Concerned Women for America, The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, and a host of other groups. Together we will prevail.

Looks to me like Santorum needs the James Dobson voters to continue to support him in droves.

Another diversion for the media from the truly pressing issues. WTG, Santorum.

GO NEWT!

[Mariner]

This retarded dimwit would prosecute individuals for "receiving porn".

Technically you could classify Playboy as porn. Hell, 1/2 the shows on Showtime on Saturday could also be technically so classified.

[DainBramage]

He cant win when they accuse him of this. If he denies it they say he supports porn. If he says its true he becomes enemy number one to the Libertarians.

[manc]

just got 3 replies and yours make sense.

That is a good point and something which the DOJ will have to face and I don’t mean this racist lets support breaking the voting laws group we have now

[Antoninus]

I'm old enough to remember that it was still available and still easy to get before the "enlightened" Supreme Court, so please don't try and pretend like it was hard to get when it was "outlawed" because it wasn't hard to get at all.

So you are telling me that any 12 year old could access images of two men eating each others feces when you were a kid? Spare me. I was a kid in the 1970s and things have changed completely since then in terms of access to porn. That same 12 year old kid can have thousands of images of the most sickening depravity known to man burned into his brain within 10 minutes.

The problem with your argument is that there has never been anything like the internet, and regardless of the laws on the books, once you go down the road of having the government censor any part of the internet, we're on the road to becoming China or Saudi Arabia.

The internet is no different than any other form of mass media. Obscenity laws that were applied to mass media in the 1940s could easily be applied to the internet.

And I'm sure you know that the slippery slope argument is a fallacy. That's why I'm not using it to demonstrate how the loosening of porn laws will result in even greater cultural devastation for our children and grandchildren.

[Utmost Certainty]

Santorum’s already a big enemy of Libertarians, which is yet another reason why he’ll be soundly defeated if the nominee. That’s at least 10% of the GOP electorate a candidate can’t afford to lose. For instance, Reagan won his victory by being able to unite all the elements of the GOP; Santorum can’t do this.

[Antoninus]

I take it you`re for the big government that we currently have. Afterall, it`s on the books.

Really? Have all these big government laws been on the books since 1783? Because I can assure you that anti-obscenity laws have been around since the Constitution was promulgated.

[Utmost Certainty]

Preventing 12-year olds from seeing obscene material, is the parents’ job. The Federal Govt has no business in this.

[Antoninus]

If you could guarantee 100% that the liberals wouldn't try and extend government censorship past porn once a generation or two of Americans has gotten used to an internet that is censored by the government, I think most of us would support you and others like you.

This is not hard. Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment, but almost everything else is. That has been enough of a defense since the founding of the Republic until the 1960s and could be again with a reasonable judiciary and people who actually understand the founding documents serving as elected officials.

[trappedincanuckistan]

I`m not equating the two. I`m taking your support of enforcing laws that are already on the books to it`s logical conclusion. Sorry you couldn`t follow that.

[jonrick46]

I was thinking about the article linked below. I didn’t have time to read the fine print. Once reading the article, it might not be a ruse. This may be an effort to pick up more of the women’s vote on Santorum’s part.

http://radioviceonline.com/let-me-point-out-santorum-has-suggested-no-new-laws-concerning-pornography/

[Antoninus]

Asking for a consistent definition of what’s considered ‘obscene’, is hardly using the language of the Left.

Yes it is. That is precisely the argument they used to overturn obscenity laws. But the argument is easily defeated by very simple definitions that I bet we could get 80% of the people to agree with.

If local communities want to arrive at a consensus about what’s obscene and what isn’t, that’s up to them. But this should absolutely not be the jurisdiction of the Federal Government to dictate for 300+ million people.

The internet assures that this most certainly IS a federal issue.

[Antoninus]

He cant win when they accuse him of this. If he denies it they say he supports porn. If he says its true he becomes enemy number one to the Libertarians.

Eventually, all decent people will discover that liberal-tarians are their enemies.

[manc]

no you seem unable to follow what is being said here.

Look the President and the Attorney General are there to enforce the laws, especially the Attorney General, he does not pick and choose.

You understand that thus far?

Now to equate the Govt health care law to illegal porn is pathetic and plain stupid and only the drama queen affect what the left does.

We are fighting the health care, we have every right to change existing laws, what Santorum is saying is that he will enforce the law

[Utmost Certainty]

Yes it is. That is precisely the argument they used to overturn obscenity laws. But the argument is easily defeated by very simple definitions that I bet we could get 80% of the people to agree with.

If the laws were overturned, then apparently they aren't binding any longer and Santorum is either ignorant or lying.

The internet assures that this most certainly IS a federal issue.

No, it absolutely does not. Because of the Internet's decentralized structured, it can be filtered at many different levels of access if one so desires. You can filter content at the client-end on your own home computer, or within the local network for an entire building, or internet service providers can filter content themselves, etc. In no way whatever does the Federal Government need to be involved in this.