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 ...
That's like saying lets see what people are doing in their sex life while the boat is sinking with no captain or crew. Which leads me to believe those who want morality issues front and center haven't a clue the path we're on.
Let me just say..if this nation is attacked just how significant do any think morality will be then? Further all these years when morality has been slipping out of hand why now is it an issue after the fact.
This is why the idea of morals being front and center is now to Obamas pleasure and advantage....he can and is avoiding the real problems.
You know, we all live by some sort of moral code and we don’t all agree where the lines should be drawn. But the attacks on Santorum by Newts libertine loon squad are getting a bit ridiculous. Especially since Newt has vowed to do the exact same thing, uphold the laws.
I think Antoninus is right, average IQ here at FR has diminshed. Maybe I’m contributing to that slide. LOL
As many have previously observed, Rick seems almost too willing to talk about moral issues while not adequately addressing the economy and jobs; which are primary to most voters right now. Rick already has the religious right vote “dialed in” ...so why does he feel the need to keep proving himself on moral issues???
I’m getting fed up with people hear saying that Freepers don’t care about moral issues.....that’s just marlarky and the old self-righteous pride raising it’s ugly head which Santorum is all about...and sure looks like the ONLY thing they have concerns about.
They’re chasing smoke when the fire is right in front of their eyes. When you put out the fire the smoke moves out.
I pointed out that is was highly unlikely that those laws were passed by lawmakers that believed that the law was needed for morality's sake. That they were passed simply because you cannot have a society grow and prosper without them.
To wit, she claimed that they were all laws that 'legislate morality.'
My rebuttal was that"they are laws that regulate behavior. and that "Morality is the intentions and decisions a person both holds and makes prior to their actions."
Therefore, as she's shown that behavior and morality are the same thing in her view... I gave an example. I took a shower today. As she's on record with this, she will have to say that my shower is moral or amoral. Or else rethink her line of reasoning.
And then she's got the gall to post to trappedincanuckistan about how he can't win an argument over this issue because she's all that and a box of Pocky sticks.
---
I agree that morality governs behavior in individuals. I find that making laws to enforce morality, however, is a bad idea. It means that government has the right and the power to change what you believe.
And that is appalling to any free man.
I’m getting fed up with people hear saying that Freepers don’t care about moral issues.....that’s just marlarky and the old self-righteous pride raising it’s ugly head which Santorum is all about...and sure looks like the ONLY thing they have concerns about.
They’re chasing smoke when the fire is right in front of their eyes. When you put out the fire the smoke moves out.
Saying that issues regarding morality are important in no way indicates that other issues are not important.
I'm kind of tired of seeing that false dichotomy around here.
As for the observation that morality is not important to some freepers, look more carefully. There are scores of freepers who don't understand that the moral structure on which this country was founded cannot be removed without destroying the country. Most of them are Paul Libs who haven't started shaving yet and love their porn, but they're here.
I'm kind of appalled that people who've chosen Gingrich over Santorum are so filled with animosity toward Rick that they mock him for things they should believe in as well (like enforcing the laws of the land he's talking about here??).
(Not accusing you here, caww, but I've seen it in others, and I've been arguing here against anti-moral arguments that could be on any leftist website anywhere).
You haven’t factually refuted anything.
You seem unable to differentiate between issues like pornography and murder, and you are all about judgment (look through the thread!).
You also don’t seem to have any idea where internet regulation would lead (I’ll give you a hint - you won’t have forums to moralize on!).
Finally, you are absolutely tone deaf if you think Santorum’s focus on social issues rather than jobs/growth are the keys to electoral victory.
As I said previously, discussing anything with nanny staters is a complete waste of time.
I’m off to enjoy a green beer! (I hope that doesn’t offend your sensibilities!)
You can make up all the nonsense you want about showers and 'pocky sticks,' but it doesn't change the fact that we have always had laws to legislate morality, and the argument against them comes from the hard left.
Freedom is not the same as license, zilla. The arguments you're putting forward aren't about freedom, as understood by the Founders. They're about your wanting your own way, and your definition of morality reflects the reasoning of the age-level that can't think beyond their own personal desires.
And the criminal infrastructure that arose during prohibition didn't go away. They moved on to smuggling and distributing other controlled substances.
Very well said godzilla. I wish I had come up with that answer re behavior and morality. I’m off to grab a green beer. Enjoy your day.
Why do you keep making things up like this? I've never said anything of the sort, canuck.
There is a huge difference between believing in the enforcement of the laws and being a 'nannystater.' The fact that you can't think beyond that meme is why you can't respond rationally.
As for the green beer, I prefer a Shamrock shake, but thanks for bringing up another strawman to support your leftist perspective.
It's a perfect ending to this conversation between a conservative American (me) and a Canadian leftie (you!). :)
It's the only thing he's comfortable talking about because that's where he's based his political career in the past and well known in congress for just that.
Further he simply isn't abreast of the issues as we see him struggle time and again to frame his position trying to remember what he was told to say.
All in all, you consider it “slanted”, just because it shows the weakness in leadership of your favorite candidate.
Straw man.........ALL the way. :)
“It’s the only thing he’s comfortable talking about because that’s where he’s based his political career in the past”
With a clean slate of achievements, that’s all he can keep talking about. He’s a nosing, pompous, sanctimonious bore.
I dont' think that's the case at all....they aren't anti-moral and that's why you're having difficulty. I oppose the idea of making morals the main issues in this primary because that is exactly what obama and the Democrats want to see to distract from the massive failures of his administration. Santorum is playing in that game because he's "comfortable" talking about morality.....it's what he claims to know best and known by that in congress, as I said before.
Morality issues should not be the focus and the longer the media pushes this on the Republicans, and people continue to discuss it...the more ground they win every single day.
THAT is the issue.....we're being derailed from the real problems.
It's very relevant and not a straw man. Here's why:
Every espoused political position has a benefit and also a cost. Each attracts some voters and alienates others. Political strategy rests on getting the right set of issues which will energize you base in support of you WITHOUT energizing your opponent's base AGAINST you to an even greater degree.
Gun control is an example of such an issue. The Democrats have lots of supporters who are very much in support of gun control. Supporting gun control energizes their base. Unfortunately for the Dems in 1994, the Clinton Gun Ban may have pleased the Dem base, but it energized the Republican base against them even more, and they were swept from Congress a few months later.
Having porn bans as a major campaign issue is similarly counter-productive.
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.