but in any case, you may or may not remember that Reagan's AG, Ed Meese, chaired a big commission that found that porn was the greatest threat to our civilization ever.
Then the internet came along. How'd that work out? Not too goodPorn is a ‘public health crisis’ and a menace, GOP committee says in platform draft.
Republican delegates unanimously adopted an amendment to their draft platform Monday morning that called pornography “a public health crisis” and a “public menace” that is destroying lives.
The language went further in its condemnation of porn than the 2012 GOP platform, which condemned child pornography and encouraged the enforcement of obscenity and pornography laws.
...
Maybe they need to watch the Sarah Palin porn parodies?
(Should this be on the Porn Star board or moved to Politics and Religion?
Palin was always more of a libertarian than the fundamentalist christian conservative the MSM tried to make her out to be. She'd occasionally drop double entendres into her speeches -- for instance, on Alaskan oil her phrase was "Drill baby, drill."
Unless you can somehow convince me that a sizable segment of those attending the Republican National Convention WON'T be watching porn in their hotel rooms or hiring hookers.
The highest porn usage occur in blue states ....like Kansas. So , yeah , i expect pay for view is gonna boost the profits for a few hotels......and I hope they're prepared for slow wifi....lol
But don't take this lightly. The right wing is constantly looking for wedge issues. Women health care rights ( abortion ) and same sex marriage isn't working as well as it use to. And they aren't to sure how the immigration issue is going plus Obama hasn't tried to collect our guns , so , maybe porn will be their next big thing.
but in any case, you may or may not remember that Reagan's AG, Ed Meese, chaired a big commission that found that porn was the greatest threat to our civilization ever.
Then the internet came along.
How'd that work out?
Not too good
Sorry , caught this too late to edit.
But yes , red states download more porn
The reason why they always bring up "porn" is because of religion. Religion or "Christian" religions look down at porn. So in turn if you are a political party that is waving around "good Christian" philosophies.... you need to say PORN BAD... BIBLE GOOD.
That is why "right wing" canidates always throw out a jab at porn.
Trump and Newt are verifiable threats to civilization as we know it..
They are just too fixated on the social issues (anti porn agenda, gay marriage, abortion, etc)...
The next President will likely appoint 2-3 Supreme Court justices (though Merrick Garland should already have been seated on the high court) along wih numerous Circuit Court nominees (ie; DC Circuit, 9th Circuit, etc) and will appoint a new Attorney General......If its an AG in an Republican administration, expect alot of XXX industry prosecutions....They might not win any, but they would certainly fight that battle...
Kiss your porn goodby
Plus other freedoms.
Roe vs Wade will be revisited
Same sex marrying will be challenged
Contraceptive choices might be restricted ( but don't worry guys , they'll never outlaw condoms )
List continues
This misunderstands the role of the SCOTUS. They don't draft legislation. They decide if laws are consistent with the US Constitution.
Plus other freedoms.
Roe vs Wade will be revisited
Same sex marrying will be challenged
Contraceptive choices might be restricted ( but don't worry guys , they'll never outlaw condoms )
List continues
Soul.....
100% correct!!!!!
People now think that the SCOTUS makes laws or what ever. They just say if the LAW is just or unjust. If it follows the constitution and bill of rights. Then it is up to the elected officials to adjust the law, revoke the law, etc.
Our freedoms wont be taken from us.
Only individuals from the very right wing mindset will be appointed and approved.
Legal litmus test are applied by both parties. That's why elections matter.
Yes , first amendment rights could most certainly be threatened.
Conservative/originalist judges abhor activist social policy creating decisions. Those are for the people or their representatives to decide. To them, the only legitimate questions for courts to decide is whether the laws are repugnant to the Constitution using the intent of the "dead white guys" who wrote it as the primary source material. The reason SCOTUS nominations have become so controversial is that when you believe in a "living constitution" you need to trust the judgment of living judges.
It's not really DC area hobby scene so ....
-- Modified on 7/14/2016 7:31:37 PM