Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pornography is a pox on our nation and culture and a major source of temptation for countless men, including me. I would love to see it eliminated.
Most children today have had experience with pornography at alarmingly young ages, and it isn't the soft-core "Playboy" material. One of the most gravely harmful effects of the internet has been to make the most obscene filth easily available to all. You could respond that parents should install a filter at home should they not want their children to be exposed to this toxic scum, but with an increasing number of children having access to internet-enabled mobile phones and the possibility of exposure at their friends' homes, it is not so simple. Although both are immoral, there's also a difference between seeing a picture of a nude woman provocatively posed - which young males entering puberty have been able to see in "stashes" of magazines for decades - and a high-definition video of an orgy, complete with close-ups of genitals and other degrading acts that are too vile to be mentioned here. Watching such a video - and especially if it becomes habitual - is pernicious to the moral development of adolescents.
As for those who ignorantly claim that pornography is not a "conservative" issue, pornographic materials were illegal, and laws tightly enforced, up until the 1950's or 1960's, when the Supreme Court made some unfortunate decisions that have led to where we are today. A "conservative" position, by definition, is one that "conserves". To put a clamp down on pornography is certainly "conserving" morals.
Of course, a complete ban leading to pornography's non-existence won't happen. But Sen. Santorum has the good of the nation in mind like few other candidates when he says he wants to wage a war on porn. He might not be able to stop its distribution outright, but he could perhaps create a voluntary national internet filter, as has been done in Australia, or tighten age enforcement for pornographic websites, etc.
Pornography is a pox on our nation and culture and a major source of temptation for countless men, including me. I would love to see it eliminated.
Most children today have had experience with pornography at alarmingly young ages, and it isn't the soft-core "Playboy" material. One of the most gravely harmful effects of the internet has been to make the most obscene filth easily available to all. You could respond that parents should install a filter at home should they not want their children to be exposed to this toxic scum, but with an increasing number of children having access to internet-enabled mobile phones and the possibility of exposure at their friends' homes, it is not so simple. Although both are immoral, there's also a difference between seeing a picture of a nude woman provocatively posed - which young males entering puberty have been able to see in "stashes" of magazines for decades - and a high-definition video of an orgy, complete with close-ups of genitals and other degrading acts that are too vile to be mentioned here. Watching such a video - and especially if it becomes habitual - is pernicious to the moral development of adolescents.
As for those who ignorantly claim that pornography is not a "conservative" issue, pornographic materials were illegal, and laws tightly enforced, up until the 1950's or 1960's, when the Supreme Court made some unfortunate decisions that have led to where we are today. A "conservative" position, by definition, is one that "conserves". To put a clamp down on pornography is certainly "conserving" morals.
Of course, a complete ban leading to pornography's non-existence won't happen. But Sen. Santorum has the good of the nation in mind like few other candidates when he says he wants to wage a war on porn. He might not be able to stop its distribution outright, but he could perhaps create a voluntary national internet filter, as has been done in Australia, or tighten age enforcement for pornographic websites, etc.
CHRISTIAN TALIBAN ALERT!!!!!!!!
Oh, please! If you don't have the capability to stop your kids from viewing porn, you are a retarded parent. Others shouldn't have to be penalized for your ineffectiveness. Don't shove your lame moral values down the throat of others. What is this? 1950s?
Oh, please! If you don't have the capability to stop your kids from viewing porn, you are a retarded parent. Others shouldn't have to be penalized for your ineffectiveness. Don't shove your lame moral values down the throat of others. What is this? 1950s?
The 1950s were a far morally superior time than today.
And parents shouldn't have to go through the effort now required to prevent their children from seeing pornography.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
