Santorum blames the president for porn

[Liability]

How fucking hard is it to ask your kid's friends' parents if they have internet content filters, because you're concerned that in the event they surf the internet unsupervised, they may do what boys do and try to look at unacceptable content?

You sound like a pussy, I'm not gonna lie.

Studiously missing the point, as is your usual tactic.

Listen up, douche nozzle.

As I already noted, it is not practical to assume that I (or any other parent) will be able to even meet all the pals of my kids, much less all of their parents.

And even if I could, chatting amicably with them about their familiarity with internet security and safety is not a gurantee of how well their kids might have found some ways around those things.

Further, you conveniently ignored the problem of the public libraries where the libs like the ACLU and certain librarians insist that there is a First Amendment issue preventing them from prohibiting access to porn sites for library patrons.

You are a pussy. That's the truth. But you aren't a very forthright person.

 

[Caroljo]

If not for the internet, how are kids going to learn about sex?

Look. We learned in the gutter. So can they.

I'm 55 and I still haven't talked to my parents about sex

When my kids asked questions about sex, I told them......Google it

I'm afraid there's many parents like you....the ones that want the schools or government to handle all their kids problems instead of teaching them yourselves.

 

[mudwhistle]

If not for the internet, how are kids going to learn about sex?

Look. We learned in the gutter. So can they.

I'm 55 and I still haven't talked to my parents about sex

When my kids asked questions about sex, I told them......Google it

These days parents ask the kids about sex. They probably know more about it than anyone.

 

[EriktheRed]

One of my areas of legal practice has been in the porn industry. Porn stars and porn filmmakers. I've been to their homes. There has been not a single one that I know that allows their childen unsupervised access to the internet. There are no computers in the rooms of their children. It's in the living room or den where the parents (active in the porn industry) watch everything on that screen.

There is no kind of filter that can replace a parental eye. Of course the parents have to care about that. Liberal parents think that early and frequent exposure to hard core sexual content is necessary to their children's development.

Not surprised at all to read that coming from you.

 

[rightwinger]

Look. We learned in the gutter. So can they.

I'm 55 and I still haven't talked to my parents about sex

When my kids asked questions about sex, I told them......Google it

I'm afraid there's many parents like you....the ones that want the schools or government to handle all their kids problems instead of teaching them yourselves.

Talk to your kids about sex?

That's disgusting

 

[GHook93]

Hey stupid I heard Santorum on CNN this morning. Just like everything the Huffingglue posts is dishonest. He isn't talking about getting rid of porn he is talking about getting hard on kiddie porn. He quoted some startling stats about the huge drop in the chiddie porn prosecution under the Holder reign.

Are you really against Santorum's crusade against kiddie porn? Do you watch kiddie porn is that why your against Santorum's crusade?

Rick Santorum: Pornography Not A Priority For Obama Administration

Obama is the president of the United States. He holds a completely different office than what Santorum is running for. As president, Mr Obama has no control over porn. (Santorum does not know that and he's depending on others being as ignorant as he is.)

As National Sheriff of Sex, fruitier than a nutcake Santorum will be in charge of everything that goes on behind closed doors. Needless to say, the Catholic church will be immune to any and all laws, so young boys will be no more safe then than they are now.

 

[Missourian]

I'm no fan of Bush, Obama, or Santorum.
and you talked of "reasonable person" and "clearly offensive" in regard to state laws. Why are these state laws in place and how do they define these terms? Who defines "community standards" and why should people be subjected to them in their own homes? If it's a state to state issue, why does Santorum want to stick his nose in a state issue?

I would imagine "community standards" are established by the community, i.e. local, county, state.

It becomes a federal issue when the obscene material is transmitted by mail, television, internet, etc. across state lines.

These are the same laws that give the FCC the right to fine CBS for the infamous "wardrobe malfunction".

That's what I thought regarding the federal issue. Now, Am I supposed to be upset because some religious zealots who may be in my community or someone else's aren't having their religious laws upheld? It may hurt their feelings that I'm viewing something they don't approve of? Excuse me for telling them to fuck off.

There is a constitutional procedure in place to change federal law and challenge to constitutionality of law. If you believe you are being treated unfairly, of that your rights are being abridged, I would humble suggest you use them.

Or would you prefer the Executive branch of government just tell the Legislative branch and the Judicial branch to simply "fuck off" anytime they feel the law impedes their personal agenda?

 

[mudwhistle]

I'm 55 and I still haven't talked to my parents about sex

When my kids asked questions about sex, I told them......Google it

I'm afraid there's many parents like you....the ones that want the schools or government to handle all their kids problems instead of teaching them yourselves.

Talk to your kids about sex?

That's disgusting

No way Jose'

 

[mudwhistle]

By the time they're old enough to talk about it with they already know enough.

 

[elvis]

I would imagine "community standards" are established by the community, i.e. local, county, state.

It becomes a federal issue when the obscene material is transmitted by mail, television, internet, etc. across state lines.

These are the same laws that give the FCC the right to fine CBS for the infamous "wardrobe malfunction".

That's what I thought regarding the federal issue. Now, Am I supposed to be upset because some religious zealots who may be in my community or someone else's aren't having their religious laws upheld? It may hurt their feelings that I'm viewing something they don't approve of? Excuse me for telling them to fuck off.

There is a constitutional procedure in place to change federal law and challenge to constitutionality of law. If you believe you are being treated unfairly, of that your rights are being abridged, I would humble suggest you use them.

Or would you prefer the Executive branch of government just tell the Legislative branch and the Judicial branch to simply "fuck off" anytime they feel the law impedes their personal agenda?

Forgive me for not being upset that some religious laws are being violated and not upheld. It is the religious zealots who have an agenda and Santorum is their candidate and spokesperson.

 

[mudwhistle]

That's what I thought regarding the federal issue. Now, Am I supposed to be upset because some religious zealots who may be in my community or someone else's aren't having their religious laws upheld? It may hurt their feelings that I'm viewing something they don't approve of? Excuse me for telling them to fuck off.

There is a constitutional procedure in place to change federal law and challenge to constitutionality of law. If you believe you are being treated unfairly, of that your rights are being abridged, I would humble suggest you use them.

Or would you prefer the Executive branch of government just tell the Legislative branch and the Judicial branch to simply "fuck off" anytime they feel the law impedes their personal agenda?

Forgive me for not being upset that some religious laws are being violated and not upheld. It is the religious zealots who have an agenda and Santorum is their candidate and spokesperson.

Sorry, folks like Santorum gives Christians a bad image.

He's a bit extreme.

 

[EriktheRed]

There is a constitutional procedure in place to change federal law and challenge to constitutionality of law. If you believe you are being treated unfairly, of that your rights are being abridged, I would humble suggest you use them.

Or would you prefer the Executive branch of government just tell the Legislative branch and the Judicial branch to simply "fuck off" anytime they feel the law impedes their personal agenda?

Forgive me for not being upset that some religious laws are being violated and not upheld. It is the religious zealots who have an agenda and Santorum is their candidate and spokesperson.

Sorry, folks like Santorum gives Christians a bad image.

He's a bit extreme.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Something I actually agree with from muddy.

 

[Peach]

Hey stupid I heard Santorum on CNN this morning. Just like everything the Huffingglue posts is dishonest. He isn't talking about getting rid of porn he is talking about getting hard on kiddie porn. He quoted some startling stats about the huge drop in the chiddie porn prosecution under the Holder reign.

Are you really against Santorum's crusade against kiddie porn? Do you watch kiddie porn is that why your against Santorum's crusade?

Rick Santorum: Pornography Not A Priority For Obama Administration

Obama is the president of the United States. He holds a completely different office than what Santorum is running for. As president, Mr Obama has no control over porn. (Santorum does not know that and he's depending on others being as ignorant as he is.)

As National Sheriff of Sex, fruitier than a nutcake Santorum will be in charge of everything that goes on behind closed doors. Needless to say, the Catholic church will be immune to any and all laws, so young boys will be no more safe then than they are now.

******************************************
Santorum is again explaining one of his off the cuff statements. He needs to quit the "crusades" and discuss issues. Santorum offers soundbites, and not much else, THUS FAR. But is getting votes, and it isn't because of "position papers".

 

[Missourian]

In the meantime, Let's have a pity party for the religious zealots across the country whose religious laws aren't being upheld. I'd like to thank Missourian for pointing out the issue at hand.

Opposition to obscenity isn't reserved to religious organizations.

Parental organizations oppose obscenity.

Feminist groups oppose obscenity. In fact Gloria Steinem founded the group Woman Against Pornography.

In fact, the majority of Americans oppose obscenity.

Backing for vigorous enforcement [of obscenity law] was found in all demographic groups, including

women (87%),

men (72%),

high school graduates (85%),

college graduates (82%),

whites (81%),

blacks (78%),

singles (72%),

married people (83%),

married with children (85%),

married without children (69%),

Catholics (82%),

Baptists (80%)

"born again" Christians (85%),

Republicans (79%),

Democrats (77%),

Independents (85%),

those who approve the President's job performance (80%)

and those who do not (81%).


Support for enforcement was highest among 18-to-34-year-old women, at 90%, but "only 60% of men in the same age group agree," Wirthlin reported.



This was "the most striking difference in support levels" among age cohorts.


Full Article

​

Now, this ^ is an old poll, 1997.




This one is from 2002:

PUBLIC OPINION

• Eight out of ten Americans (81%) believe federal laws against Internet obscenity should be vigorously enforced, and seven out of ten (70%) believe that strongly. A higher percentage of women support vigorous enforcement of federal laws against Internet obscenity than men -- 90% versus 72% (Wirthlin Survey, 2002).
• On the other hand, seven out of ten Americans (70%) say they do not believe these laws are currently being vigorously enforced (Wirthlin Survey, 2002).

Enough is Enough: Protecting our Children Online


​

But I appreciate you revealing your anti-religious bias.


Now feel free to tell 80% of the population, the state legislature, the state judiciary, the federal legislature, the federal judiciary and the Supreme Court to "fuck off" because we all know the solution to laws we oppose is to ignore them and do whatever we want. Right?

 

[ScienceRocks]

There is a constitutional procedure in place to change federal law and challenge to constitutionality of law. If you believe you are being treated unfairly, of that your rights are being abridged, I would humble suggest you use them.

Or would you prefer the Executive branch of government just tell the Legislative branch and the Judicial branch to simply "fuck off" anytime they feel the law impedes their personal agenda?

Forgive me for not being upset that some religious laws are being violated and not upheld. It is the religious zealots who have an agenda and Santorum is their candidate and spokesperson.

Sorry, folks like Santorum gives Christians a bad image.

He's a bit extreme.

I agree...Santorum belongs to the portion of the right that wants big government to enforce their goals. Same as the leftist.

 

[Peach]

In the meantime, Let's have a pity party for the religious zealots across the country whose religious laws aren't being upheld. I'd like to thank Missourian for pointing out the issue at hand.

Opposition to obscenity isn't reserved to religious organizations.

Parental organizations oppose obscenity.

Feminist groups oppose obscenity. In fact Gloria Steinem founded the group Woman Against Pornography.

In fact, the majority of Americans oppose obscenity.

Backing for vigorous enforcement [of obscenity law] was found in all demographic groups, including

women (87%),

men (72%),

high school graduates (85%),

college graduates (82%),

whites (81%),

blacks (78%),

singles (72%),

married people (83%),

married with children (85%),

married without children (69%),

Catholics (82%),

Baptists (80%)

"born again" Christians (85%),

Republicans (79%),

Democrats (77%),

Independents (85%),

those who approve the President's job performance (80%)

and those who do not (81%).


Support for enforcement was highest among 18-to-34-year-old women, at 90%, but "only 60% of men in the same age group agree," Wirthlin reported.



This was "the most striking difference in support levels" among age cohorts.


Full Article

​

Now, this ^ is an old poll, 1997.




This one is from 2002:

PUBLIC OPINION

• Eight out of ten Americans (81%) believe federal laws against Internet obscenity should be vigorously enforced, and seven out of ten (70%) believe that strongly. A higher percentage of women support vigorous enforcement of federal laws against Internet obscenity than men -- 90% versus 72% (Wirthlin Survey, 2002).
• On the other hand, seven out of ten Americans (70%) say they do not believe these laws are currently being vigorously enforced (Wirthlin Survey, 2002).

Enough is Enough: Protecting our Children Online


​

But I appreciate you revealing your anti-religious bias.


Now feel free to tell 80% of the population, the state legislature, the state judiciary, the federal legislature, the federal judiciary and the Supreme Court to "fuck off" because we all know the solution to laws we oppose is to ignore them and do whatever we want. Right?

*********************************************
Each group may have a different definition.

 

[elvis]

In the meantime, Let's have a pity party for the religious zealots across the country whose religious laws aren't being upheld. I'd like to thank Missourian for pointing out the issue at hand.

Opposition to obscenity isn't reserved to religious organizations.

Parental organizations oppose obscenity.

Feminist groups oppose obscenity. In fact Gloria Steinem founded the group Woman Against Pornography.

In fact, the majority of Americans oppose obscenity.

Backing for vigorous enforcement [of obscenity law] was found in all demographic groups, including

women (87%),

men (72%),

high school graduates (85%),

college graduates (82%),

whites (81%),

blacks (78%),

singles (72%),

married people (83%),

married with children (85%),

married without children (69%),

Catholics (82%),

Baptists (80%)

"born again" Christians (85%),

Republicans (79%),

Democrats (77%),

Independents (85%),

those who approve the President's job performance (80%)

and those who do not (81%).


Support for enforcement was highest among 18-to-34-year-old women, at 90%, but "only 60% of men in the same age group agree," Wirthlin reported.



This was "the most striking difference in support levels" among age cohorts.


Full Article

​

Now, this ^ is an old poll, 1997.




This one is from 2002:

PUBLIC OPINION

• Eight out of ten Americans (81%) believe federal laws against Internet obscenity should be vigorously enforced, and seven out of ten (70%) believe that strongly. A higher percentage of women support vigorous enforcement of federal laws against Internet obscenity than men -- 90% versus 72% (Wirthlin Survey, 2002).
• On the other hand, seven out of ten Americans (70%) say they do not believe these laws are currently being vigorously enforced (Wirthlin Survey, 2002).

Enough is Enough: Protecting our Children Online


​

But I appreciate you revealing your anti-religious bias.


Now feel free to tell 80% of the population, the state legislature, the state judiciary, the federal legislature, the federal judiciary and the Supreme Court to "fuck off" because we all know the solution to laws we oppose is to ignore them and do whatever we want. Right?

Anti religious bias? No. Anti religious government bias. Absolutely. With porn as rampant as it is, I don't believe that that many men want it illegal. It's a moral and religious laws that Im not upset about being violated. And nice straw man at the end saying I think we can do whatever we want. I'm sorry if you want the country run as a theocracy.
And since I'm sure 80 percent of the south was pro slavery, I'm sure you'd agree with ignoring laws about not rescuing slaves...No wait... Ignoring them Would be out of procedure.

 

[elvis]

Forget about the economy and terrorism. Someone could be watching porn somewhere. Let's elect Santorum so we can have a president who has his priorities straight.

 

[Missourian]

In the meantime, Let's have a pity party for the religious zealots across the country whose religious laws aren't being upheld. I'd like to thank Missourian for pointing out the issue at hand.

Opposition to obscenity isn't reserved to religious organizations.

Parental organizations oppose obscenity.

Feminist groups oppose obscenity. In fact Gloria Steinem founded the group Woman Against Pornography.

In fact, the majority of Americans oppose obscenity.

Backing for vigorous enforcement [of obscenity law] was found in all demographic groups, including

women (87%),

men (72%),

high school graduates (85%),

college graduates (82%),

whites (81%),

blacks (78%),

singles (72%),

married people (83%),

married with children (85%),

married without children (69%),

Catholics (82%),

Baptists (80%)

"born again" Christians (85%),

Republicans (79%),

Democrats (77%),

Independents (85%),

those who approve the President's job performance (80%)

and those who do not (81%).


Support for enforcement was highest among 18-to-34-year-old women, at 90%, but "only 60% of men in the same age group agree," Wirthlin reported.



This was "the most striking difference in support levels" among age cohorts.


Full Article

​

Now, this ^ is an old poll, 1997.




This one is from 2002:

PUBLIC OPINION

• Eight out of ten Americans (81%) believe federal laws against Internet obscenity should be vigorously enforced, and seven out of ten (70%) believe that strongly. A higher percentage of women support vigorous enforcement of federal laws against Internet obscenity than men -- 90% versus 72% (Wirthlin Survey, 2002).
• On the other hand, seven out of ten Americans (70%) say they do not believe these laws are currently being vigorously enforced (Wirthlin Survey, 2002).

Enough is Enough: Protecting our Children Online


​

But I appreciate you revealing your anti-religious bias.


Now feel free to tell 80% of the population, the state legislature, the state judiciary, the federal legislature, the federal judiciary and the Supreme Court to "fuck off" because we all know the solution to laws we oppose is to ignore them and do whatever we want. Right?

Anti religious bias? No. Anti religious government bias. Absolutely. With porn as rampant as it is, I don't believe that that many men want it illegal. It's a moral and religious laws that Im not upset about being violated. And nice straw man at the end saying I think we can do whatever we want. I'm sorry if you want the country run as a theocracy.
And since I'm sure 80 percent of the south was pro slavery, I'm sure you'd agree with ignoring laws about not rescuing slaves...No wait... Ignoring them Would be out of procedure.

First, Santorum is not talking about pornography, he is referring to Obscenity Laws.

Second, these laws have already been approved by Congress, Upheld by the Supreme Court and enforced by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Is it your contention that we are living under a theocracy right now???

Is it your contention that we have been living under a theocracy for the last 20 years???

Because if that is your contention you have left the realm of logic and reason and are living in a anti-religion fueled dream world.

 

[Katzndogz]

Democrats support children's access to hard core pornography. Yes. We get it.