“I’m hoping this will start educating people that pornography is actually addictive, that it’s harmful to families and relationships,” says Senator Weiler in a phone interview.
Weiler acknowledges First Amendment rights to make and view pornography. Although the resolution does not put forward any particular policy solution, he says he ultimately “would like to see the US work toward an Internet that is porn free unless you opt into it.”
Some critics of the Utah resolution see it as yet another conservative attempt to shore up heterosexual marriage as the acceptable context for sex. A Salon.com headline ridiculed it as “porn hysteria.” But where some see an effort to reframe conservative morality under the guise of public health, crafters of the legislation point to issues from elementary school age children accessing hard-core porn to cases of sex trafficking and child abuse. (read more)
9 comments:
Wow, "societal harms." What couldn't be banned or regulated under that umbrella?
All sorts of things are addictive and ruin lives. Where to start?
The 1st Amendment is under attack from the left and right.
The premise needs more study.
You know, I've found that 24-hour news channels, as well broadcast morning news and nightly news programs, are addictive to many individuals. The more these people watch the news, the more paranoid they become. Such people are likely to yell, curse, and otherwise berate people based on a some story they saw on the news. This is causing societal harm. So you know what needs to be done?
Watch naked news.
Yes, naked news is very....soothing.
I only watch Megyn Kelly in the nude. Strangely I do the same with The View, but for different reason.
Playboy joins war on porn
I am not a fan of pr0n. I'm not saying I've never seen it, just saying not a fan. Having said that, I think it should be left alone and not have government intrude further into its 'regulation. Seems highly unnecessary and prudish.
Post a Comment