Small-government, non-regulating Santorum

WhKnuckle
Profile picture for user WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
WhKnuckle
Edited Date/Time 3/17/2012 9:05am
His latest is that, if he becomes President, he'll ban pornography...

Dude, the ship has sailed. If you don't like it, don't watch it. I know I don't, but I don't care if other people do. It's none of my business.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/rick-santorum-wants-ban-hardcore-por…
|
gabrielmalinois 3/16/2012 12:44pm
3/16/2012 12:44pm
Somehow both you and writer missed the illegal aspect of what Santorum said.

The former Pennsylvania senator states that, "as a parent, I am concerned about the widespread distribution of illegal obscene pornography and its profound effects on our culture."
fcr
Profile picture for user fcr
Posts
9347
Joined
12/1/2006
Location
Monkeys Eyebrow YE
fcr 3/16/2012 12:48pm
3/16/2012 12:48pm
He is an idiot.
WhKnuckle
Profile picture for user WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
WhKnuckle 3/16/2012 12:51pm
3/16/2012 12:51pm
gabrielmalinois wrote:
Yeah, there is lots of illegal pornography out there.
There are a lot of illegal computer hackers and identity thieves out there, how about going after them if you're going to clean up America?

The reason pornography isn't prosecuted is because the definition of "obscenity" is a local one. So how is the federal government going to prosecute that?

And beyond that, I don't think many Americans put pornography on the top of their list of worries. But I guess if you're creating a Taliban state, it doesn't really matter what the people think, it only matters what the Mullahs think.

The Shop

See All »
burn1986
Profile picture for user burn1986
Posts
9768
Joined
4/16/2010
Location
bossier city, LA US
Fantasy
3303rd
burn1986 3/16/2012 12:58pm
3/16/2012 12:58pm
Can't blame a guy for trying. Romney will win the nomination. These other guys needs to concede. Santorum might be a good bid for VP.
purpleNurple
Profile picture for user purpleNurple
Posts
912
Joined
1/29/2010
Location
Fort Stewart, GA US
purpleNurple 3/16/2012 1:07pm
3/16/2012 1:07pm
burn1986 wrote:
Can't blame a guy for trying. Romney will win the nomination. These other guys needs to concede. Santorum might be a good bid for VP.
Everybody but Romney is vying for a convention nomination. They are all trying to stop Romney from getting 1100 delegates. They are not trying to win in delegates just win over the convention. Newt has all but said this to the public now.
WhKnuckle
Profile picture for user WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
WhKnuckle 3/16/2012 1:12pm
3/16/2012 1:12pm
burn1986 wrote:
Can't blame a guy for trying. Romney will win the nomination. These other guys needs to concede. Santorum might be a good bid for VP.
purpleNurple wrote:
Everybody but Romney is vying for a convention nomination. They are all trying to stop Romney from getting 1100 delegates. They are not trying to win...
Everybody but Romney is vying for a convention nomination. They are all trying to stop Romney from getting 1100 delegates. They are not trying to win in delegates just win over the convention. Newt has all but said this to the public now.
Yep. But in doing it, they're basically conceding the election to Obama. Why would they go to all this trouble just to decide which one of them is going to lose? It'd be like a bunch of VitalMX guys fighting it out to get in a match race with Villopoto.
purpleNurple
Profile picture for user purpleNurple
Posts
912
Joined
1/29/2010
Location
Fort Stewart, GA US
purpleNurple 3/16/2012 1:14pm
3/16/2012 1:14pm
WhKnuckle wrote:
Yep. But in doing it, they're basically conceding the election to Obama. Why would they go to all this trouble just to decide which one of...
Yep. But in doing it, they're basically conceding the election to Obama. Why would they go to all this trouble just to decide which one of them is going to lose? It'd be like a bunch of VitalMX guys fighting it out to get in a match race with Villopoto.
I agree with you in the thinking its stupid. However I am not convinced yet.. that Obama cleans house. I think Obama is going to have his hands full answering questions during debates, how is he going to spin gas prices and the economy into his favor?
gabrielmalinois 3/16/2012 1:16pm
3/16/2012 1:16pm
gabrielmalinois wrote:
Yeah, there is lots of illegal pornography out there.
WhKnuckle wrote:
There are a lot of illegal computer hackers and identity thieves out there, how about going after them if you're going to clean up America? The...
There are a lot of illegal computer hackers and identity thieves out there, how about going after them if you're going to clean up America?

The reason pornography isn't prosecuted is because the definition of "obscenity" is a local one. So how is the federal government going to prosecute that?

And beyond that, I don't think many Americans put pornography on the top of their list of worries. But I guess if you're creating a Taliban state, it doesn't really matter what the people think, it only matters what the Mullahs think.
I don't know what his full position on this issue is and I don't think the reasons he gave to ban pornography are the most important that apply to pornography, but a lot of pornography that is consumed is illegal and what people who are against it should realize (and those who use it) is that it is not as much a matter of it's detriment to the consumer or the culture but the facts that many who are depicted are under age and / or engaging in it against their will. The industry is a meat grinder that preys on and exploits young women who most undoubtedly had been sexually victimized as children and a large number of these children and women are slaves who are bought and sold.
WhKnuckle
Profile picture for user WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
WhKnuckle 3/16/2012 1:20pm
3/16/2012 1:20pm
gabrielmalinois wrote:
Yeah, there is lots of illegal pornography out there.
WhKnuckle wrote:
There are a lot of illegal computer hackers and identity thieves out there, how about going after them if you're going to clean up America? The...
There are a lot of illegal computer hackers and identity thieves out there, how about going after them if you're going to clean up America?

The reason pornography isn't prosecuted is because the definition of "obscenity" is a local one. So how is the federal government going to prosecute that?

And beyond that, I don't think many Americans put pornography on the top of their list of worries. But I guess if you're creating a Taliban state, it doesn't really matter what the people think, it only matters what the Mullahs think.
gabrielmalinois wrote:
I don't know what his full position on this issue is and I don't think the reasons he gave to ban pornography are the most important...
I don't know what his full position on this issue is and I don't think the reasons he gave to ban pornography are the most important that apply to pornography, but a lot of pornography that is consumed is illegal and what people who are against it should realize (and those who use it) is that it is not as much a matter of it's detriment to the consumer or the culture but the facts that many who are depicted are under age and / or engaging in it against their will. The industry is a meat grinder that preys on and exploits young women who most undoubtedly had been sexually victimized as children and a large number of these children and women are slaves who are bought and sold.
Underage pornography is already prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If anyone wants to find out what the inside of prison looks like, that's a sure way to do it. We don't need Rick Santorum to do that.
gabrielmalinois 3/16/2012 1:34pm
3/16/2012 1:34pm Edited Date/Time 3/16/2012 1:36pm
WhKnuckle wrote:
There are a lot of illegal computer hackers and identity thieves out there, how about going after them if you're going to clean up America? The...
There are a lot of illegal computer hackers and identity thieves out there, how about going after them if you're going to clean up America?

The reason pornography isn't prosecuted is because the definition of "obscenity" is a local one. So how is the federal government going to prosecute that?

And beyond that, I don't think many Americans put pornography on the top of their list of worries. But I guess if you're creating a Taliban state, it doesn't really matter what the people think, it only matters what the Mullahs think.
gabrielmalinois wrote:
I don't know what his full position on this issue is and I don't think the reasons he gave to ban pornography are the most important...
I don't know what his full position on this issue is and I don't think the reasons he gave to ban pornography are the most important that apply to pornography, but a lot of pornography that is consumed is illegal and what people who are against it should realize (and those who use it) is that it is not as much a matter of it's detriment to the consumer or the culture but the facts that many who are depicted are under age and / or engaging in it against their will. The industry is a meat grinder that preys on and exploits young women who most undoubtedly had been sexually victimized as children and a large number of these children and women are slaves who are bought and sold.
WhKnuckle wrote:
Underage pornography is already prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If anyone wants to find out what the inside of prison looks like, that's...
Underage pornography is already prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If anyone wants to find out what the inside of prison looks like, that's a sure way to do it. We don't need Rick Santorum to do that.
Most of it isn't happening in the US so the only way to prosecute it is to prosecute consumers but you can only get a very small portion. Santorum is probably like most people who view it from the perspective of the consumer or the culture but the detriment is to those who are either exploited willingly because they once were exploited unwillingly and think that is normal and all they are worth and worst those who are literally sex slaves who are forced to do it. Take internet porn for instance, how can you possibly know the age of the person and if they are forced to against their will. So yeah when the issue is phrased in the context of "two consenting adults" that has been decided but the problem is often they are not consenting and not adults. When Santorum says "illegal pornography" I believe he is referring to illegal pornography. That is the type of stuff that makes it illegal right?
WhKnuckle
Profile picture for user WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
WhKnuckle 3/16/2012 1:52pm
3/16/2012 1:52pm Edited Date/Time 3/16/2012 1:55pm
Santorum's position isn't just against illegal pornography, like child pornography, which everyone is against and is already vigorously prosecuted. It's against ALL pornography. Read the statement:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"America is suffering a pandemic of harm from pornography," Santorum's official website reads. "Pornography is toxic to marriages and relationships. It contributes to misogyny and violence against women. It is a contributing factor to prostitution and sex trafficking."

The former Pennsylvania senator states that, "as a parent, I am concerned about the widespread distribution of illegal obscene pornography and its profound effects on our culture."

Santorum criticized the Obama administration for turning "a blind eye ... to the scourge of pornography" and for refusing to enforce obscenity laws.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The fact is, there are existing laws against child pornography and they're already prosecuted. Other types of pornography may or may not be prosecuted based on local definitions of obscenity (which are not prosecuted by Federal courts anyway). But Santorum simply wants to do away with all of it because HE has decided it's obscene. Just like HE decided contraceptives are immoral. He's an American Taliban candidate, and that's all there is to it. His insertion of "illegal" is a bullshit qualifier - almost no pornography is illegal on a federal level; obscenity is determined on a local level.

I can see why Santorum said Kennedy's speech that the Pope wouldn't dicated policy made him want to throw up. He thinks the Pope SHOULD dictate policy. He thinks the Pope - or Santorum himself - has the right to dictate everyone's values. I remember when he decided, from Washington DC, that a brain-dead woman in Florida was "human life" and it was illegal to disconnect her from life support machines.

Yeah, that's a small-government advocate for you.
gabrielmalinois 3/16/2012 2:37pm
3/16/2012 2:37pm
All the laws that are needed are existing they just are not enforced. It is kind of like how Obama handles illegal immigration. Turns the "blind eye".
Barrett57
Profile picture for user Barrett57
Posts
2270
Joined
8/31/2010
Location
GB
Barrett57 3/16/2012 4:09pm
3/16/2012 4:09pm
The same old lies that we have all heard before. Who beleives that shit? They can't actually fool people twice with the whole WMD thing can they?
WhKnuckle
Profile picture for user WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
WhKnuckle 3/16/2012 6:21pm
3/16/2012 6:21pm
So Santorum's mantra is that you achieve liberty by adopting the morals - many of which have no basis in any kind of religious or ethical declaration - that I will force on you when I'm president.

Good luck with that campaign, Rick.
rosebud441
Profile picture for user rosebud441
Posts
1766
Joined
1/25/2012
Location
Bellingham, WA US
rosebud441 3/17/2012 8:05am
3/17/2012 8:05am
If elected Rick, Will outlaw masturbation for men... OMG your wasting babies..

Post a reply to: Small-government, non-regulating Santorum