Constitutional Amendment to ban porn?

[barman07]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/20...ge-for-ban-on-porn-and-same-sex-marriage.html

Haha, a female presidential candidate with a crazy meter surpassing Sarah Palin. I wonder how far she will go.

 

[Jupiter551]

wow what a crackpot

 

[Nordling]

Yeah, Crazy Sarah seems like the height of statemanship (stateswomanship?) compared to Bachman the Insane.

 

[SatanJonez]

By saying she is against gays AND porn she's knocked out like 90% of America voting for her, lol.

 

[Jupiter551]

Let me illustrate just how insane she is.

She wants to ban THIS. :tard:

 

[lordmagellan]

Will never happen. We've the best lawyers in the world (just ask Caycee and OJ), porn (which is wholly subjective) would have to be definitively defined, and if that happens, someone would scream that tramples on the first amendment which guarantees freedom of speech. All the while porn would be defended based on artistic merit.

And I, personally, would fashion a spiked dildo out of radioactive iron to bash the crazy bitch's head in if she happened to find a way to deny me my precious porn! You see? Porn doesn't cause rape; it prevents violent murder.

 

[SatanJonez]

I've been trying to think what banning porn would solve? Husbands will still cheat (maybe even more so, since I personally don't consider porn a form of cheating - just a mental release causing a physical release), children one way or another will still be exposed to sexual themes, gay people will still be gay & new gay people will still be born & people will still get divorced. Nothing would change except people might be a bit more tense & there would be a shit load of people out of jobs. If anything I think an overall rise in aggressive situations would take place because (not pointing fingers at anyone here) sometimes, porn is all people have to get the primal urge of fucking off their backs. You can only masturbate to your own thoughts for so long.

Also, what would be considered porn? The dirty websites I'm sure this lady's husband views on a daily/weekly basis? The naughty DVDs he has stashed in their garage? Or would it extend onward to cutting out the sex scenes in movies (which, let's be honest are far less graphic than normal porn), teaching kids a censored version of sex ed, magazines showing pictures of bikini clad or skimpy outfit wearing women? Porn is such a general word to these types of people.

And banning porn to "protect women" is the dumbest load of shit I've ever seen another female say. Ever. I don't know about other countries, but in the U.S. no one has been "forced" to do mainstream porn in decades. The legal repercussions of that are so great most big name producers of smut will just tell whatever chick is pitching a fit that they can find someone else a lot cheaper & nicer to do the scene if they don't want to do it. While that maybe a bit manipulative, in the end it's ALWAYS the woman's decision whether or not she would like to continue with whatever is happening and 9 times out of 10, she will.

It's kind of like banning gay marriage. The worst that can happen if gay people get married is...wait for it...gay people get married. Derp.

 

[lordmagellan]

And banning porn to "protect women" is the dumbest load of shit I've ever seen another female say. Ever. I don't know about other countries, but in the U.S. no one has been "forced" to do mainstream porn in decades. The legal repercussions of that are so great most big name producers of smut will just tell whatever chick is pitching a fit that they can find someone else a lot cheaper & nicer to do the scene if they don't want to do it. While that maybe a bit manipulative, in the end it's ALWAYS the woman's decision whether or not she would like to continue with whatever is happening and 9 times out of 10, she will.

The wife and I talked about this today. My thought is the women who are raising hell about the women in porn are simply threatened by a woman who embraces and is empowered by her sexuality. It seems to me to the single most misogynistic idea that women hate sex and are not sexual creatures by nature. And yet, it's other women making those performers, be it porn, stripping, or even prostitution feel like trash. If anything those women are exploiting the millions of men (and women) who shell out billions of dollars for the experience. Hell, some days I think porn is the only industry keeping our currency in circulation.

And booze.

 

[SweepTheLeg]

I didn't think she had a chance in hell prior to signing this and now she guaranteed it. Seems like the only way to get any attention as a republican is to be more bat shit crazy than the last. Palin to Trump to Bachman, makes me wonder who the next one will be and how they'll top this.

 

[Bocefish]

Some of the crack-pot ideas politicians come up with make me wonder how they even got in their position to begin with. IIRC, Ron Paul wants to legalize heroin too.

If Bachman really wanted to help, she should focus on the epidemic of human sex trafficking.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -epidemic/

 

[Zoomer]

Is there a link which clearly states what the "ban on porn" is? As in a ban on production? on the sale of? Of viewing? On advertisement? On distribution?

The link says nothing about it - leaving everything up to an individuals imagination what such a sweeping statement means :roll:

To me it all sounds like a way to get your name known widely, and nothing else :lol: How many politicians actually do what they pledge?

 

[omalleytac]

Wow, this woman seriously needs to get her thumb out of her ass... Gay marriage and people who decide to live polyamorously should be able to do so freely. Its not like women or poly's are trying to fuck her anyways.

Omalleytac

 

[AshleyMarks]

Some of the crack-pot ideas politicians come up with make me wonder how they even got in their position to begin with. IIRC, Ron Paul wants to legalize heroin too.

If Bachman really wanted to help, she should focus on the epidemic of human sex trafficking.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -epidemic/

I very much agree that human trafficking is a more important issue than porn. I have witnessed the horrendous lives of girls forced to work the street. I actually lived that way at one time.... At 18, I got out of foster care, I had no place to go, no money, no identification and I had to survive. I was a renegade... I worked for me, and no matter how hard a "pimp" would try to coax me into working for them, I had the power to say no. I did get addicted to drugs for about 6 months, and then I met a guy willing to help me get out of the situation. I have been drug-free since October 31, 2005 and I came out healthy and free of disease. I believe that living that lifestyle for a while did help me to realize that nothing is guaranteed and that so many others that I used to know have no way out because they are too far gone or have tragically passed away due to murder, OD, or suicide. I feel like I can relate to those who are being trafficked, but I did it to myself. It was definitely a learning experience for me. I now live a happy and semi- productive life, but I dabbled in the strip club biz for a while, and maybe sometimes I still have the mentality that sex is all I am good for, because although I did not get arrested or have any charges pressed against me, it is still real difficult to find a job that is not sex- related. I hope that nobody judges me for this.... But hopefully by now, we can be considered friends and this will not change the way you guys feel about me. I am now 24, and I look back on what I used to do and think, "what if I never experienced that?" I carry my heart on my sleeve most of the time, and take things too harshly at times, but I thought that I would share my take on this.... and my personal experience... Please don't misunderstand me.... :love10: And here's a laugh......http://johntv.com/?p=1177 and done.

 

[Nordling]

Everything Bachman says is rooted in hyper-religious fantasy. She is remarkable, I have to admit, but in a very bizarre way. Makes one wonder about Minnesota voters. lol Her husband is equally strange, and with all her posturing about "government spending," her husband's (actually she is an owner too) "clinic" takes state and federal funds. And that should be cut off immediately, since the clinic is practicing uncertified, crackpot therapy:

http://www.thenation.com/article/16...inics-owned-michele-bachmann’s-husband-practi

 

[Mikeythegeek]

A few facts to say why this is ultimately much ado about nothing.

1- The pledge that Bachmann (and former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum) signed also makes the implication (pretty early on in the statement too) that children born in to slave families pre-Civil War were in better parenting situations than most African-American children are in today. So to them, being treated as property instead of being treated as a actual human being was a good thing for those kids. Give me a fucking break. At least the group behind this pledge is backing off that part now.

2- In response to the uproar over this pledge, the dope who created that pledge is claiming that the anti-porn pledge targets the forced participation in pornography and prostitution even though the wording of the pledge clearly states that the target is all porn. Of course, if he was being truthful, we would get on board with that part. But of course, he's just covering his ass.

3- If you read through the entire pledge, you can argue that it implies that Bachmann shouldn't even be in politics! It pretty much implies that she and every other woman should be in the kitchen making sammichs and squirting out babies.

I think I just made myself sick with that comment. Mental image fail.

4- Does the Bible really say anything for or against gay marriage? No, it doesn't.

5- If you were to rank the candidates for President solely on whether the general voting population could vote for them over Barack Obama in 16 months time, Bachmann and Santorum are way the fuck down on the list. As a political junkie, I can say this with 100% confidence- those who are popular picks in July won't be popular picks in January when the primaries begin. There's too much time for them to fuck up and for any skeletons in their past to appear. The first one will likely be Bachmann's husband coming out of the closet (because don't they all eventually).

(All links found on Fark.com)

 

[barman07]

Is there a link which clearly states what the "ban on porn" is? As in a ban on production? on the sale of? Of viewing? On advertisement? On distribution?

The link says nothing about it - leaving everything up to an individuals imagination what such a sweeping statement means :roll:

To me it all sounds like a way to get your name known widely, and nothing else :lol: How many politicians actually do what they pledge?

http://www.thefamilyleader.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/themarriagevow.final_.7.7.111.pdf

Part of the vow:

Humane protection of women and the innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy – our next generation of American children –
from human trafficking, sexual slavery, seduction into promiscuity, and all forms of pornography and prostitution,
infanticide, abortion and other types of coercion or stolen innocence.

So trafficking and sexual slavery is in the mix.

Pr0nibition awaits us.

 

[Keithy]

Seduction into Promiscuity? They want to ban puberty?

 

[SweepTheLeg]

Puberty, like homosexuality is a choice.

 

[Jupiter551]

We must protect the innocent fruit of our conjugal congress from seduction into puberty!

Then we'll send them out to kill foreigners.

 

[morment]

At least the group behind this pledge is backing off that part now.

It aggravates me when politicians say something offensive/stupid then back pedal when they're inevitably called on it.
The group responsible for that pledge had to have more than one person working on the wording of it for a while, and they expect people to believe that nobody realized that that part might be horribly offensive and way off base before releasing it for view by the general public. Ridiculous.

 

[AshleyMarks]

What a fucking racist bitch. That Bachman definitely won't get my vote. She hates everybody, doesn't she? Porn stars, gays, blacks, people that support these people, I mean where the hell does she get these ideas from?

 

[schlmoe]

First off, this lady is an idiot...but a brilliant idiot! She's getting her "family values" platform across the airwaves and blog-o-sphere without spending a dime of her election war-chest. Bachman and almost every one else knows this "proposal" doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell in succeeding, but she's got everyone talking about her. I don't think it will get her elected, but it WILL get her votes, and in the end, get money (even your tax dollars through matching funds) flowing to her war-chest so she can (try) to advance her silly-ass views. IMHO, that's what this is all about...money. We'd all be better off turning our outrage to something that means a rats ass...ending human trafficking...yeah, that's a good place to start.

What most people don't get, is one of the hardest things to accomplish in the USA is to pass a new constitutional amendment. Overturning a Supreme Court ruling (i.e.: abortion) is almost just as hard. This just goes to show once again that our Founding Fathers were pretty smart. To get started, both Houses must "propose" an amendment with 60% approving. Then, 75% of state legislatures (or state conventions) must approve, and the proposed amendment may or may not have a deadline. There have been instances where a new amendment took over 100 years to gain full approval. Some "good" amendments never made it. Go ask Gloria Steinem or Betty Friedan how the ERA worked out...

Just like making candidates declare their stand on abortion, gay marriage, etc..., this incident is a gigantic "push poll" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_poll).

The best way to combat these idiots and fools is to educate ourselves on how the process works...and maybe get involved!

/endrant