The idea that a person has to spend one minute in jail for a film made by consenting adults and sold to consenting adults is the very opposite of freedom. It is tyranny pure and simple. There is no peer reviewed study that shows that porn causes an increase in violence against women. The actors/actresses do this consensually and claiming career limiting economic situations is the same as somebody pointing a gun to a person's head and forcing them to be a porn star is the absence of sanity.
Not speach. Porn just cannot meet the criteria of "speach" intended by the founding fathers. Porn mixes violence and sex in a way that promotes the abuse of women. It has nothing to do with speach and everything to do with hate, male inadequacies, and just plain stupidity of the masses. Note: not all erotica is porn.
Why did the Justice Dept. target just Stagliano? I mean, there are 1000s, if not hundreds of thousands, of pornographers out there! How is Stagliano's work any more "obscene" than all the other porn videos out there? There are tons of videos and websites, but those people don't normally get prosecuted.
Isn't bureaucrash owned by AEI? It's surprising that a conservative think tank would let bureaucrash talk about this in such a manner. I agree with the video, but you never hear normal conservatives talking about porn as free speech.
People have a right to make, watch, and sell whatever they want. If you don't like it, don't buy it. I'm no porn advocate (I'm a devote Catholic, in fact), but that doesn't mean it's right to let elected officials strip American's of more rights. What's "right" and "wrong" sure as hell isn't the concern of the government.
You do not get it. So why not force children into sexual slavery and the porn industry? and since when is the government not concerned with "right" and "wrong"? you make not sense, we do have laws.
I have a hard time with Porn as speech theory. Pornography is not speech it is an act of producing film that is often degrading and may even promote violence against women. I happen to be someone who uses my civil rights and it is not porn laws that obstruct my freedoms; it is tresspass, obstruction, and distrubtion charges that are used against us.
Porn laws might not obstruct your freedoms, but that's only because you don't make or watch porn. Laws governing artistic, Bollywood or childrens' sing-along films wouldn't affect me, but of course that's not an excuse to accept them if they come to pass.
As to the claim that they degrade women? Nonsense. If you happen to feel that way, voting with your wallet is a convenient way to avoid the films without stomping all over someone else's rights.
You may not like porn. You may be offended by it for some reason. Still, it is a form of artistic expression and thus falls under free speech. It harms no one like some religions do and nobody is trying to stop people from having freedom of religion. The only group, theory, or movement that promotes violence against women are those espoused by radical feminists.
Not in your bedroom, in the public. Sorry but porn is harmful and an abundance of research proves that fact. It is not artistic, nor is it speach, just hate speach in the form of promoting violence and degredation of women. Note: errotica is not porn, which mixes sex and violence. But then your hate of feminist is very telling of how you feel about women in general.
Why do you think that movies involving consensual acts between adults promotes unacceptable violence when they're naked, but not when they have clothes on. We see "real" violence portrayed in film all the time, but suddenly once people get naked something's different. If you don't want to watch it, don't watch it. I've certainly never watched any pornography depicting any acts I would deem as violent.
Cloths are not the issue, nudity does not bother me, it is the depiction of forced sex, the mix of sex and violence, the errotification of the degredation of women. Review you porn with a more critical mind. BTW there is a big difference between errotica and porn.
Why don't you bring up the degradation of men? There's plenty of porn involving males only if you want to watch that. I think it's a very sexist opinion that porn somehow degrades women when they are involved but does not degrade men (if you believe it degrades anyone at all). Again, I personally wouldn't want to watch any porn involving violence, real or simulated. However, some people *do* like that and some people enjoy participating in it. What is wrong with that?
The women in porn don't seem to feel as you do. I mean, this is a free country. Very few, if any, are acting cuz of some kind of illegal sex trafficking.
If the women don't have a problem with it, why should anyone else? If you have consensual kinky sex with your woman, is that necessarily degrading? Probably not, you might say. So, why, then, is it "degrading" you film it?
How do you know how the women feel? Do they have other economic opportunities? Not all porn is born of consent. Kinky is not degrading, necessarily. However, forced sex is errotified even in main stream film, violence and sex is so mixed in our culture we view it uncritically. And many men just hate women.
I agree. It would be very "prudent" to "review" the material at issue.
Really, though, capitalistpunk is correct. There is nothing in an "obscenity" charge that is justifiable. Any actually criminal act would be prosecuted under different laws.
If they were recordings of criminal acts, I might see your point. In reality, though, they're just strange. (imho - but hey, apparently someone likes it.)
hmm. If we define porn as the intersection of violence and sex, and understand that it promote violence againt women (google "forced sex" if you have any doubt),then it is an act of hate, not an act of speach in the sense the founding fathers intended or can be philosophically defended.
There is no undeniable proof that porn promotes violence against women just as there is no undeniable proof that video games promote violence in general. Rape is an issue of force and control. Porn is NOT defined as the intersection of violence and sex. Porn is sexual acts transmitted through media, MOST of which is consensual. There is no immediate relation to violence or hate, thus your position is moot.
The idea that a person has to spend one minute in jail for a film made by consenting adults and sold to consenting adults is the very opposite of freedom. It is tyranny pure and simple. There is no peer reviewed study that shows that porn causes an increase in violence against women. The actors/actresses do this consensually and claiming career limiting economic situations is the same as somebody pointing a gun to a person's head and forcing them to be a porn star is the absence of sanity.
Crazypower274 2 years ago
well said
smallrevolutions 2 years ago
Not speach. Porn just cannot meet the criteria of "speach" intended by the founding fathers. Porn mixes violence and sex in a way that promotes the abuse of women. It has nothing to do with speach and everything to do with hate, male inadequacies, and just plain stupidity of the masses. Note: not all erotica is porn.
smallrevolutions 2 years ago
Why did the Justice Dept. target just Stagliano? I mean, there are 1000s, if not hundreds of thousands, of pornographers out there! How is Stagliano's work any more "obscene" than all the other porn videos out there? There are tons of videos and websites, but those people don't normally get prosecuted.
whoo689 3 years ago
I love porn. :) Really good porn is an art form.
whoo689 3 years ago
I know art when I see it and porn ain't it.
smallrevolutions 2 years ago
Isn't bureaucrash owned by AEI? It's surprising that a conservative think tank would let bureaucrash talk about this in such a manner. I agree with the video, but you never hear normal conservatives talking about porn as free speech.
whoo689 3 years ago
CEI, actually.
gotamd 2 years ago
Meh, I think time and resources would be better spent on more practical things like freeing Kareem.
Alternate2GOP 3 years ago
People have a right to make, watch, and sell whatever they want. If you don't like it, don't buy it. I'm no porn advocate (I'm a devote Catholic, in fact), but that doesn't mean it's right to let elected officials strip American's of more rights. What's "right" and "wrong" sure as hell isn't the concern of the government.
gimbij 3 years ago
You do not get it. So why not force children into sexual slavery and the porn industry? and since when is the government not concerned with "right" and "wrong"? you make not sense, we do have laws.
smallrevolutions 2 years ago
I have a hard time with Porn as speech theory. Pornography is not speech it is an act of producing film that is often degrading and may even promote violence against women. I happen to be someone who uses my civil rights and it is not porn laws that obstruct my freedoms; it is tresspass, obstruction, and distrubtion charges that are used against us.
smallrevolutions 3 years ago
Porn laws might not obstruct your freedoms, but that's only because you don't make or watch porn. Laws governing artistic, Bollywood or childrens' sing-along films wouldn't affect me, but of course that's not an excuse to accept them if they come to pass.
As to the claim that they degrade women? Nonsense. If you happen to feel that way, voting with your wallet is a convenient way to avoid the films without stomping all over someone else's rights.
capitalistpunk 3 years ago
voting with wallet is not enough. porn and violence against women intimately intersects. Time for change.
smallrevolutions 2 years ago
You may not like porn. You may be offended by it for some reason. Still, it is a form of artistic expression and thus falls under free speech. It harms no one like some religions do and nobody is trying to stop people from having freedom of religion. The only group, theory, or movement that promotes violence against women are those espoused by radical feminists.
The government has no business in our bedrooms.
PoetryManTV 3 years ago
Not in your bedroom, in the public. Sorry but porn is harmful and an abundance of research proves that fact. It is not artistic, nor is it speach, just hate speach in the form of promoting violence and degredation of women. Note: errotica is not porn, which mixes sex and violence. But then your hate of feminist is very telling of how you feel about women in general.
smallrevolutions 2 years ago
Why do you think that movies involving consensual acts between adults promotes unacceptable violence when they're naked, but not when they have clothes on. We see "real" violence portrayed in film all the time, but suddenly once people get naked something's different. If you don't want to watch it, don't watch it. I've certainly never watched any pornography depicting any acts I would deem as violent.
gotamd 3 years ago
Cloths are not the issue, nudity does not bother me, it is the depiction of forced sex, the mix of sex and violence, the errotification of the degredation of women. Review you porn with a more critical mind. BTW there is a big difference between errotica and porn.
smallrevolutions 2 years ago
Why don't you bring up the degradation of men? There's plenty of porn involving males only if you want to watch that. I think it's a very sexist opinion that porn somehow degrades women when they are involved but does not degrade men (if you believe it degrades anyone at all). Again, I personally wouldn't want to watch any porn involving violence, real or simulated. However, some people *do* like that and some people enjoy participating in it. What is wrong with that?
gotamd 2 years ago
The women in porn don't seem to feel as you do. I mean, this is a free country. Very few, if any, are acting cuz of some kind of illegal sex trafficking.
If the women don't have a problem with it, why should anyone else? If you have consensual kinky sex with your woman, is that necessarily degrading? Probably not, you might say. So, why, then, is it "degrading" you film it?
whoo689 3 years ago
How do you know how the women feel? Do they have other economic opportunities? Not all porn is born of consent. Kinky is not degrading, necessarily. However, forced sex is errotified even in main stream film, violence and sex is so mixed in our culture we view it uncritically. And many men just hate women.
smallrevolutions 2 years ago
Stay strong, John!
Scammington 3 years ago
I don't feel comfortable forming an opinion until I have a chance to review the films in question.
mackler 3 years ago
It's really not about what's in the films in question - rights aren't arbitrarily determined on a case-by-case basis.
To snag the tagline from The People vs. Larry Flint: "You may not like what he does, but are you prepared to give up his right to do it?"
capitalistpunk 3 years ago
I hear where you're coming from, but I still think it would be prudent to review the material at issue. Call me Mr. Cautious.
mackler 3 years ago
I agree. It would be very "prudent" to "review" the material at issue.
Really, though, capitalistpunk is correct. There is nothing in an "obscenity" charge that is justifiable. Any actually criminal act would be prosecuted under different laws.
RobertlewisIR 3 years ago
right. If it actually involved harm to a persons property or person it would be a vandalism or assault charge... or similar... NOT obscenity
thorsmitersaw 3 years ago
If they were recordings of criminal acts, I might see your point. In reality, though, they're just strange. (imho - but hey, apparently someone likes it.)
capitalistpunk 3 years ago
Heh, you may discover something about yourself you never knew about.
egosumabbas 3 years ago
I support Stagliano. I personally hate porn, but I'll be dad gummed if I'm going to let the government tell me what I can and cannot do or watch.
texichan 3 years ago
hmm. If we define porn as the intersection of violence and sex, and understand that it promote violence againt women (google "forced sex" if you have any doubt),then it is an act of hate, not an act of speach in the sense the founding fathers intended or can be philosophically defended.
smallrevolutions 2 years ago
There is no undeniable proof that porn promotes violence against women just as there is no undeniable proof that video games promote violence in general. Rape is an issue of force and control. Porn is NOT defined as the intersection of violence and sex. Porn is sexual acts transmitted through media, MOST of which is consensual. There is no immediate relation to violence or hate, thus your position is moot.
texichan 2 years ago
Satist bastards!
subach 3 years ago