This should be a new talking point: Kamala Harris is the reason nearly all porn is produced in California.

[dangus]

For a while a couple of decades ago, before Spam filters were effective, I had an email address on the front page of a web site. Such a public address attracted tons of spam, and a bizarrely huge portion of that spam was porn.

I was baffled as to why our government allowed such horrors to be legal. And no, perverts disguising as libertarians, I don't just mean nudity. There were a few selling points that would come up again and again, and one was promises of seeing incest and/or rape. I sure hope most of this was merely acting, and not the actual depiction of crime. But even so, surely this failed the Miller test.

See, the Miller test was a standard the Supreme Court used to legalize porn without voting to legalize porn. It said porn could be prohibited if "the average person, applying contemporary community standards", would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; if the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions[4] specifically defined by applicable state law; and if the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Surely banning rape and incest, even if it were acting, would pass the Miller test, right? And surely it's prostitution, right? Not in Kamala Harris' California. Harris wasn't the first Attorney General of California or of San Francisco to passively approve of rape porn. In fact, she only became AG of the state after spam filters made my job a lot less disgusting. But as the first known prostitute to become Attorney General, she certainly did allow the porn industry in California to flourish unrestrained.

Now, Republicans labeling Harris a whore doesn't work politically, even if she actually was legally a whore. It comes off all 19th-century patriarchical, women-blaming, etc. After all, it sort of *is* men's fault that Willie Brown was allowed to make his whore San Francisco's district attorney. To make the point, there is no word that sounds as viscerally loathing to describe Willie Brown. "John" just doesn't compare with "whore."

But rape porn? For all the pure nonsense that prostitution is "empowering" to women, how can rape porn be anything of the sort? And if there has ever been one woman who COULD have done something about rape porn, it was Kamala Harris, who decided that rape porn is either not offensive or it doesn't violate community standards.

Let the Democrats defend Kamala Harris's position on rape porn.

[PGalt]

LOL!

[Sirius Lee]

What’s her campaign slogan going to be? “Strike a blow for America”?

[DCBryan1]

Well, technically, she should be proud as if the race is between Harris and Trump, they have both taken shots to the face.

[Dahoser]

Yes please, let’s talk about everything except the illegals, the economy and giving billions to Ukraine, because complaining about what people watch in their own homes and injecting religion into a political party totally won over the voters in the past, right?

I agree: stick to the issues. My early take on Biden dropping out and Harris taking over is that she's being used to get President Trump off the issues as he has been during the debate and his convention speech and back to doing mean tweets so they can paint him as the Bad Man Orange again.

[CodeToad]

Kneepad Kammy was a prostitute. Anyone around in 1994 remembers the story of Willie Brown’s “high-end call girl”, who was Kalama Harris.

[Carry_Okie]

...complaining about what people watch in their own homes and injecting religion into a political party totally won over the voters in the past, right?

Legally outlawing violent porn is not as much about the viewer of porn; it's the acts involved in the production of it.

One can reasonably argue that porn does motivate the viewer to mimic the acts they "enjoyed," but one lacks definitive data proving to what degree that is really true. One can reasonably argue that enforcement standards against porn are unnecessarily intrusive until an actual act of mimicry produces real victims. Nor is it reasonable to argue that victims of sexual violence were not seriously harmed.

That question speaks to why we have Federalism. States have the power to employ different standards of enforcement than do the Feds. While some enforcement standards might themselves become offensive, the variation in standards allows the laboratory of liberty to run the political experiments whereby to generate reliable data. Hence, I'm perfectly fine with San Francisco or LA becoming a moral cesspool, but perhaps the people of Utah don't want that. I am expecting that once-beautiful city of San Francisco to degenerate into a violent and ungovernable wreck. And we all get to find out how that works with the difference in statistics from those respective jurisdictions.

And so it goes.

[Carry_Okie]

Anyone around in 1994 remembers the story of Willie Brown’s “high-end call girl”, who was Kalama Harris.

Anyone around in 1994 should remember that the depraved trolls at KPFA in Berkeley were touting Kamala Harris as potentially a future President.

Their joke is on us.

[Vaduz]

Willie Brown was allowed to make his whore San Francisco’s district attorney.

And the democrat party made her VP she must be good at her advancement skills and swing both ways?.