Posted on 03/16/2012 10:56:03 PM PDT by Steelfish
Santorum Says He Would Enforce US Obscenity Laws That Obama Ignores By NBC's Andrew Rafferty
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL -- Rick Santorum accused President Barack Obama of not enforcing the country's obscenity laws and said Friday that as chief executive he would crack down on illegal pornography.
Santorum found himself answering pornography questions during a stop at an Italian restaurant here after the discovery of a statement posted in his campaign website in which he asserts that "America is suffering a pandemic of harm from pornography." Recent reporting has shed light on the letter in which the former Pennsylvania senator vowed to "vigorously enforce" all the country's obscenity laws, though he said the statement was posted three weeks ago.
"We actually respond to questions that we get into our campaign when they say 'What are you going to do about these issues?' And when we respond we post them up on our website. And the response is, ‘we'll enforce the law,’" said Santorum.
"I don’t know what the hubbub about that is," he said. "We have a president who is not enforcing the law, and we will."
The candidate best known for espousing family values argues on his website that pornography causes changes in the brain to both children and adults, and contributes to violence against women, prostitution and sex trafficking. "The Obama administration has turned a blind eye to those who wish to preserve our culture from the scourge of pornography," he wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at firstread.msnbc.msn.com ...
Wrong Mr. Trapped. We're talking about obscenity laws. You told me that the only valid laws are laws concerning aggression, violence and contracts. To be clear do you think that local laws concerning public obscenity are valid and thus you must broaden your scope a bit?
Also, have you found a law yet that doesn't have somebody's morality at it's base?
And one other thing, are you a pro choice libertarian or a pro life libertarian?
“What will then be the difference between America and the dictatorships and theocracies?”
There won’t be any difference sadly. These people advocating Federal regulation of the internet fail to see that it will eventually lead to government tyranny.
Here’s what’s wrong with that attitude. There are plenty of people who aren’t political junkies and care deeply about the country. These are folks who will get their news from a variety of sources, including the Internet but don’t don’t spend time on websites like this. There are also those who also care about the country but for one reason or another don’t have time for more than the evening news (here’s a hint, when my kids were growing up and we spent most evenings going to sports practice, scouts, youth group, etc. I had very little time for this too)...a candidate HAS to be astute enough to get his message out to these people. Look at Newt, every single time he’s thrown one of these “gotcha” questions he turns it around. The average American is going to wonder why Santorum is so focused on porn when they can barely afford to put gas in their car to get back and forth. Yes, I could go to his facebook page, but if he wants MY vote shouldn’t he do a better job of talking about his plan as often as possible? I’m here every single day. I listen to the debates. I can tell you what both Newt & Romney think should be done about the economy and I’ve never gone to either of their facebook (or campaign) pages. I know this because they talk about it. Santorum’s name is in the news every single day now and yet I know nothing about his positions. That’s a problem.
Cindie
Bravo.
Hey Socrates, did you flunk Philosophy 101? Morality governs behavior.
Thanks for posting this ... I will pass it along.
I do recognize the need for local laws regarding obscenity. Mr. Santorum is talking about the Federal Government regulating the internet. I should have said that laws primarily exist.....
Your attempt to open another avenue (abortion) to attack me me was pathetic. You wanted to change the discussion from Santorum’s position on internet regulation. I am pro life, and have stated so on many occasions.
And if Rick was qualified for the job he’s applying for he would have reacted to this with “Yes, I think the laws on the books should be enforced, but right now people are hurting and I’d really like to talk about my plan for economic freedom...” When America knows more about where a candidate stands on obscenity than what the details of his (supposedly first issue) economic freedom agenda are, that’s a huge problem. The press knows the majority of the country is focused on the economy. That’s why they do this kind of thing with him because they know he can be sucked in. They tried it with Newt and it didn’t work because he knows how to beat the press at their own game. Santorum doesn’t and he has no clue how to get his message out. It’s amateur hour.
Cindie
But let me help you out and inform you that it is complete nonsense to rational people, and therefore requires no response to its substance......
Which is non-existent.
That was a very sound post. Rick needs to understand that he brings the fight. Mr. Gingrich understands that. If Santorum continues to fight the media with their narrative, he already lost. Know what your fighting for and who your fighting against before getting in the ring.
Santorum's been getting his message out quite well in any number of states where he's been outspent 10+ to 1 and he's still picked up primary and caucus victories. I would argue that with the exceptions of SC and GA, Rick's message has been more clearly communicated than Newt's, and I would go so far as to wager that if the SC primary was being held again, Rick would probably pick that up as well.
I have factually refuted that false argument by giving many examples for which that is exactly what is being done by many of our laws.
Therefore, the embarrassment is all yours, unless you can explain to me why murder does not come under the umbrella of 'morality' in your mind.....
btw, you have a very narrow and errant definition of 'morality.' Without making any judgments, since I don't know you, it would make the most sense, from your own words, that you just don't want anyone to tell you that anything you want to do is wrong, which is why you react so emotionally to 'moralists.' But since I don't know you that would just be a wild guess.....
Okay sonny, name the FReepers who have posted here in the past that have no problems with kiddie porn. C’mon, lets see your list.
Ah, you little statist you..
Mr. Santorum is talking about the Federal Government regulating the internet.
Federal government already regulates the internet. Receiving obscene material on the internet involving real children is against the law. You have a problem with that?
I should have said that laws primarily exist.....
Yes you should have because like everybody else in this country you want your notion of morality to be reflected in the law.
Your attempt to open another avenue (abortion) to attack me me was pathetic. You wanted to change the discussion from Santorum’s position on internet regulation. I am pro life, and have stated so on many occasions
I was curious. You see I think pro choice libertarians are laughable and not worth engaging. Any philosophy that has non-aggression at it's base and is OK with aggression against those among us who can not offer a defense to that aggression is a morally bankrupt philosophy that belongs in the dump. Like the US Libertarian Party.
Not to those who wanna do whatever they wanna do because they wanna do it, and a pox on anyone who tries to stop them, because they wanna do it! ;*)
On the whole, that's quite a slanted list.
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.