Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lindykim
Dude, I usually try and refrain from commenting on the socially conservative posts here, but this is a little creepy.

Checking a criminals house for porn? There goes your freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.

Banning pornographic material? Goodbye freedom of speech!

Why don't we let the market determine what is and is not appropriate. The point of conservatism is that the government can't adequately make decisions for the individual. I think that applies in this case.
5 posted on 11/19/2004 3:13:54 PM PST by oldleft
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: oldleft

Let the market determine what is and is not appropriate?
So if the market determines that the age of consent laws should go out the door, you think they should? If the market determines that child pornography is okay, I guess it is, huh? At least, according to your bogus defintion of pornography.


19 posted on 11/19/2004 3:26:35 PM PST by mowkeka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: oldleft
Banning pornographic material? Goodbye freedom of speech!

The New Deal Commerce Clause doesn't recognize individual rights. Witness the Assault Weapons Ban.

22 posted on 11/19/2004 3:28:50 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: oldleft

agreed, keep the government out...yet if it's a sexually motivated crime, like rape it could be seen as probable cause


28 posted on 11/19/2004 3:32:51 PM PST by tai-pan (mainstream WHAT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: oldleft

In order for true conservatism to work as it should, the citizens should be morally informed and ethical. Such citizens would know better than to allow porn to proliferate in open society where it acts as a poison.


The market is amoral, and will produce anything for sale, even snake oil concoctions, unless there are morality based constraints placed upon it.


31 posted on 11/19/2004 3:34:48 PM PST by Lindykim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: oldleft

There has been a lot of discussion about the relevancy of this post. I think it's very relevant. You guys want to critisize the "moral right"...but who do you think got George Bush re-elected? And didn't George Bush agree to a Pornography Protected Day?
The point is pornography is very, very addictive. And most of the porno out there isn't your cute, bunnyrabbit Playboy stuff. Some of it is cruel, disturbing and outright dangerous.


34 posted on 11/19/2004 3:35:56 PM PST by mowkeka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: oldleft

Well, don't have to worry about a ban because it's basically hopeless on the internet. You'd have to cut the US off the internet internationally which is a non-starter.


49 posted on 11/19/2004 3:42:48 PM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: oldleft

Ping to myself ...

Remember to check the article out in a few hours after I'm done downloading porn...


63 posted on 11/19/2004 3:54:38 PM PST by Gerasimov (John Kerry just got his SECOND dishonorable discharge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: oldleft

"Banning pornographic material? Goodbye freedom of speech!"

The Framers of the constitution were interested in protecting political speech not purile entertainment.

I don't think "entertainment" should enjoy 1rst Ammendment protection. That isn't what the intent was.


85 posted on 11/19/2004 4:21:40 PM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: oldleft

Because Christians understand that the marketplace is not where the moral tone of a nation should be set. Christians understand that righteousness exalts a nation and evil degrades it. The prophets understood that just because priestesses were giving away sex in the temple of Asherah and Israelites were chosing to patronize it doesn't make it good or right.


127 posted on 11/19/2004 8:14:36 PM PST by Sam the Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: oldleft

It would be impossible to show a correlation between pornograpy and crime unless you inspect houses of criminals and non-criminals alike.

Besides, what part of this article wouldn't apply to liberalism just as well. Liberal trash is burned in the brain forever, and in some people leads to violent crime.


200 posted on 11/21/2004 5:54:19 PM PST by gitmo (Thanks, Mel. I needed that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: oldleft
Banning pornographic material? Goodbye freedom of speech!

Thanks for the non-sequitur. It appears that your only source for the history of constitutional law is The People Versus Larry Flynt. Did we not have freedom of speech before 1960? Is that your contention?

One of the best bits of proof I have seen for the notion that porn is addictive is the reaction of those who are currently addicted when someone criticizes porn. It's almost identical to what alcoholics and drug addicts say when someone criticizes their drug of choice.... Think about it...
216 posted on 11/21/2004 6:59:53 PM PST by Antoninus (Santorum in '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson