GOP’s anti-pr0n plank

[Chuck Bao]

If I remember correctly, we had a thread on Soonerfans four years ago when the Republicans included a party plank about cracking down on the proliferation of pr0n. Republican bigwigs have again deemed it important enough to include as a campaign issue this election cycle.

This Huffington Post article (yeah, I know left-leaning journalism at its best) helps explain why some Republicans have such a distaste for it: dysfunctional sex for legally married couples (one man and one woman, of course) when the husband is addicted to the scourge that is internet pr0n.

But hey, it reminds me of a Sex and the City episode, so it could be sellable election product to some wives and some potential future wives (no way discounting the fact that there could be the reverse of that, not that there is anything wrong with that).

BigTip asked us in another thread about the worst case scenarios. How about this one – every new computer sold with a pr0n filter block? Free market and all that can just take a flying leap, if we can’t produce enough Republican babies, heh?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/27/gop-anti-porn-plank-platform_n_1833840.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false


GOP Anti-Porn Plank Added To Draft Platform By Republican Committee

The Huffington Post | By Nick Wing Posted: 08/27/2012 2:15 pm Updated: 08/27/2012 2:40 pm

The GOP platform committee has included a plank in this year's draft document calling for "vigorous" enforcement of anti-pornography laws.

In a press release Monday from Morality in Media, a faith-based non-profit, President Patrick Trueman, a former anti-porn prosecutor, calls the current distribution of pornography "a violation of current federal law" and lauds Republicans for approving stricter new wording:

The new language replaces previous platform wording, which only opposed child pornography. It will now read, "Current laws on all forms of pornography and obscenity need to be vigorously enforced." Trueman noted that current federal obscenity laws not only prohibit distribution of hardcore pornography on the Internet but also on hotel/motel TV, on cable/satellite TV, and in retail shops.

In an interview with The Huffington Post's Jen Bendery, Trueman said youth access to pornography amounted to "a major, major problem," and even caused males in their twenties to develop "porn-induced sexual dysfunction."

"It's the Viagra problem for guys in their 20s," Trueman said. Young males are now spending "10 to 12 years looking at porn on the Internet and masturbating to it, so when they are getting married, they are dysfunctional sexually because their brain maps are changed. They enjoy what they've been doing for 10 to 12 years. Normal sex is not something that gets them excited."

The broader regulation, submitted by Family Research Council president and Louisiana RNC delegate Tony Perkins, also echoes GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney's position on the issue during his previous campaign for the White House.

"I wanna make sure that every new computer sold in this country after I'm president has installed on it a filter to block all pornography and that parents can click that filter to make sure their kids don't see that kinda stuff coming in on their computer," Romney said at a campaign stop in Iowa in 2007.

In February, Romney lent support to a similar effort in response to a Morality in Media questionnaire about cracking down on pornographers.

The Daily Caller reported earlier this year that Trueman, who served in the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, had received an assurance from Romney’s campaign that the former Massachusetts governor would “vigorously” prosecute pornographers if elected president.

[okie52]

If I remember correctly, we had a thread on Soonerfans four years ago when the Republicans included a party plank about cracking down on the proliferation of pr0n. Republican bigwigs have again deemed it important enough to include as a campaign issue this election cycle.

This Huffington Post article (yeah, I know left-leaning journalism at its best) helps explain why some Republicans have such a distaste for it: dysfunctional sex for legally married couples (one man and one woman, of course) when the husband is addicted to the scourge that is internet pr0n.

But hey, it reminds me of a Sex and the City episode, so it could be sellable election product to some wives and some potential future wives (no way discounting the fact that there could be the reverse of that, not that there is anything wrong with that).

BigTip asked us in another thread about the worst case scenarios. How about this one – every new computer sold with a pr0n filter block? Free market and all that can just take a flying leap, if we can’t produce enough Republican babies, heh?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/27/gop-anti-porn-plank-platform_n_1833840.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false

Chuck....you have a problem with a parental control filter to block porn from kids?

[olevetonahill]

Whats wrong with "ENFORCING CURRENT LAWS"
I dont have a prob with em ENFORCING CURRENT GUN LAWS either

[hawaii 5-0]

Whats wrong with "ENFORCING CURRENT LAWS"
I dont have a prob with em ENFORCING CURRENT GUN LAWS either


Your boy Romney worked for, got passed and signed into law a bill permanently banning assault weapons when he was governor.

I would think you'd have a problem with that.

5-0

[Midtowner]

So the party of small government thinks that the federal government needs to devote significant resources to monitoring and criminally punishing folks for looking at nekkid people?

Don't we have terrorists to fight? A border to secure? A budget to balance?

[olevetonahill]

Your boy Romney worked for, got passed and signed into law a bill permanently banning assault weapons when he was governor.

I would think you'd have a problem with that.

5-0


Oh yea? When and where was that? Link ?

[olevetonahill]

So the party of small government thinks that the federal government needs to devote significant resources to monitoring and criminally punishing folks for looking at nekkid people?

Don't we have terrorists to fight? A border to secure? A budget to balance?

Dayum just when I think you might have some sense. Where did that article say that?

[yermom]

is it much better if they just want to prevent people from looking at nekkid people?

[olevetonahill]

is it much better if they just want to prevent people from looking at nekkid people?

What I read was they wanta keep it away from Kids , I can go along with that

[Midtowner]

Dayum just when I think you might have some sense. Where did that article say that?

Existing pornography laws.

Try 'n keep up.

[Midtowner]

What I read was they wanta keep it away from Kids , I can go along with that

FTA:


"It's the Viagra problem for guys in their 20s," Trueman said. Young males are now spending "10 to 12 years looking at porn on the Internet and masturbating to it, so when they are getting married, they are dysfunctional sexually because their brain maps are changed. They enjoy what they've been doing for 10 to 12 years. Normal sex is not something that gets them excited."

[olevetonahill]

So the party of small government thinks that the federal government needs to devote significant resources to monitoring and criminally punishing folks for looking at nekkid people?

Don't we have terrorists to fight? A border to secure? A budget to balance?


Existing pornography laws.


Try 'n keep up.
So you are saying that its Currently Illegal to watch porn?
Like I said you aint got no sense

[yermom]

http://www.waronillegalpornography.com/candidates/


Already existing federal laws, upheld by the U. S. Supreme Court, prohibit distribution of hard-core obscene pornography on the Internet, on cable/satellite TV, on hotel/motel TV, in retail shops, through the mail, and by common carrier. The law is on our side. We simply need a President who is willing to demand that it be enforced.
The Obama Administration has turned a blind eye to the harm from pornography and has not initiated a single new federal obscenity prosecution since President Obama was inaugurated. In fact, they disbanded the task force organized to investigate and prosecute. We need presidential leadership on this issue. Please contact all of the candidates by email or by phone to make sure they know just how damaging it is to Americans if they allow these laws to remain uninforced.

apparently it is illegal for adults (even outside of Oklahoma) to watch porn on the internet or in a hotel room. the "small government" party wants to spend our money to enforce this as a priority

[rock on sooner]

Oh yea? When and where was that? Link ?

Ummm, Vet, google" romney assualt weapon ban" and you'll find more
info than you can read. It's another example of how well Romney comes
down on both sides of an issue..

[rock on sooner]

Prolly should spell it assault, tho...

[olevetonahill]

Prolly should spell it assault, tho...

I caan do that, Reason I asked is Most every one I know still has em so how they bained?

[rock on sooner]

I caan do that, Reason I asked is Most every one I know still has em so how they bained?

Jus guessin, but it's prolly cause the federal ban expired a few years back.
Even during the ban folks jus kept em in the gun cabinet. Ban dint stop
diddly, tho, jus changed the time of day that you bought em...

[olevetonahill]

AW I see , It was a Bipartisan bill that he signed

Cool , If you can get everyone in the Country to agree to this Im all for it .
Cause I know that aint gonna happen .

[olevetonahill]

http://www.waronillegalpornography.com/candidates/



apparently it is illegal for adults (even outside of Oklahoma) to watch porn on the internet or in a hotel room. the "small government" party wants to spend our money to enforce this as a priority

Well its Illegal to shoot camels in Arizona.

[rock on sooner]

Well its Illegal to shoot camels in Arizona.

I dint know that...Gov. Brewer is prolly of herself fer that...:highly_amused:

[olevetonahill]

I dint know that...Gov. Brewer is prolly of herself fer that...:highly_amused:

Doubt its still on the books But years ago it was
Seems the cavalry tried to use em to run dwn the Indians back in the late 1800s er sompun , dint werk out so well and some escaped. they were Government property er some such so ya couldnt shoot em

[rock on sooner]

Doubt its still on the books But years ago it was
Seems the cavalry tried to use em to run dwn the Indians back in the late 1800s er sompun , dint werk out so well and some escaped. they were Government property er some such so ya couldnt shoot em
Well, I wanted to stick "proud" in there somewhere, but yew git tha drift from
those that wanta wiggle their finger in the Prez's face....

[hawaii 5-0]

Oh yea? When and where was that? Link ?



http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-gun-conrol-nra-assault-weapons-colorado-shooting-theater-2012-7


Here's one of them. There's several references. Just Google "Romney Assault Ban".

He's since changed his tune since he needed the NRA's support. Another one of his many flip flops, just like socialized medicine. No one know which side of the fence he's be on next.

5-0

[soonercruiser]

Dang!
I like prOn! The bigger the better and juicer.
:witless:

[Chuck Bao]

Chuck....you have a problem with a parental control filter to block porn from kids?

You know damned well that I don't. Any parent can download parental filters off the internet for free and I would hope that many do. But, a federal law requiring parental filters to be installed on all new computers sold in this country seems to me to be just pandering to the religious right and another step towards the US becoming a nanny state, as well as being unnecessarily wasteful and largely ineffectual. That's almost like requiring that every car sold in America must include an infant seat.

I don't really care that much for it, but adults should be able to watch whatever they want in the privacy of their own home or in a hotel room without big brother trying to enforce some arcane obscenity laws.

We have too many real problems in this country without one party or the other trying to distract voters with "hey, look over there!".

[yermom]

i can only imagine how that would be enforced.

would wiping Windows to install Linux be a crime?

[okie52]

You know damned well that I don't. Any parent can download parental filters off the internet for free and I would hope that many do. But, a federal law requiring parental filters to be installed on all new computers sold in this country seems to me to be just pandering to the religious right and another step towards the US becoming a nanny state, as well as being unnecessarily wasteful and largely ineffectual. That's almost like requiring that every car sold in America must include an infant seat.

I don't really care that much for it, but adults should be able to watch whatever they want in the privacy of their own home or in a hotel room without big brother trying to enforce some arcane obscenity laws.

We have too many real problems in this country without one party or the other trying to distract voters with "hey, look over there!".

Every car sold in America does have infant seat attachments. Having a computer that has a parental filter doesn't obligate anyone to use it, its just an option. No adult that wants to watch porn is going to be denied that right where its legal. I fail to see your angst.

[FaninAma]

Your boy Romney worked for, got passed and signed into law a bill permanently banning assault weapons when he was governor.

I would think you'd have a problem with that.

5-0

I actually don't as long as it is done on the state level and not the federal level. In my opinion the intent of the Constitution was to allow the states to regulate social and moral issues and by having several different examples to observe, the citizens of this country could decide which laws and types of regulation were successful and which types were unwarranted intrusions into their self-determination.

To a certain extent we have that in economic regulation atlhough the true effects of state regulation has been blurred by the federal's government's intrusion into this area. In terms of moral and cultural issues the states' ability to regulate policy in this area have been obliterated by federal intervention, especially the SCOTUS' overstepping their constitutional authority.

Even by taking into account the background noise of federal intervention into states' rights area we can see the effects of the state's different approaches to regulating their local economies as witnessed by the differences in economic stability and strength among the different states. California is in the crapper while Texas and other red states seem to be faring better.

Eventually the states that govern better economically will be the beneficiary of businesses and taxpayers who want to move to that state and eventually cultural/social issues will be trumped by economic issues.

[olevetonahill]

Every car sold in America does have infant seat attachments. Having a computer that has a parental filter doesn't obligate anyone to use it, its just an option. No adult that wants to watch porn is going to be denied that right where its legal. I fail to see your angst.


What carks me up is a LIB bitchin about the Repubs Makin a NANNY STATE:pirate: