Conservative stance on porn

I am about as conservative as one gets.
you know, work hard, earn , prosper, live good.

<chuckle> CRIPES!!! No wonder! The poor guy has no clue what "conservative" means....

^
Meester, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it the Repubs who are the ones that are abject pro-Israel and support Israel's "right to defend herself" and isn't it the Dems who want to consider Palestine and a 2 State Solution?

Now why you wanna go ruinin' a good rant with a pinch of truth....shhhh but MP probably has never heard of the CUFI evangelicals and their dominance in the religious right....Understandable, he's been too busy being as conservative as one gets chasing enhanced Colombian ass. Now THAT'S conservative.:thumbsup:
 

meesterperfect

Hiliary 2020
^you just have no clue about so many things

and no tits, thats not reality.
why do you think the media is so pro dem?
I actually should have said both parties in my original statement
 
What is the official and/or typical American conservative stance on porn?

And yes, this is a serious question from someone who is not from and never has been in USA.

Not sure whether there is an 'official' Conservative stance. What I still do find quite interesting in this Land is the Federal divide (still intact?) between being allowed to purchase/view adult porn in some States and not in others (in theory anyhow). One would suspect many of the Biblical States to outright ban adult porn (again, in theory!).

Interesting thread, if one can get a conclusive answer ;)
 
I think that there's a fair amount of overlap between left and right in the USA on the issue of pornography. There are people on the far left who are against it and people on the far right who are against it. The feminist anti-porn angle (it's exploitive) is primarily embraced by those who are left-of-center. The sinful, it's-the-same-as-actually-cheating, it's filthy and disgusting angle comes mostly from the right. But it can get pretty complex within any individual. So long as porn doesn't depict, promote, glamorize, or glorify non-consensual acts, I have little problem with it. I think it needs to be regulated (no rape stuff, no kids, no animals, etc.) but allowed to exist. That's the short version...
 

Facetious

Moderated
I think that there's a fair amount of overlap between left and right in the USA on the issue of pornography. There are people on the far left who are against it and people on the far right who are against it. The feminist anti-porn angle (it's exploitive) is primarily embraced by those who are left-of-center. The sinful, it's-the-same-as-actually-cheating, it's filthy and disgusting angle comes mostly from the right. But it can get pretty complex within any individual. So long as porn doesn't depict, promote, glamorize, or glorify non-consensual acts, I have little problem with it. I think it needs to be regulated (no rape stuff, no kids, no animals, etc.) but allowed to exist. That's the short version...

Damn, you woke up on the right side of the bed this AM :1orglaugh


Seriously, this is a great post ! Reps for not ruffling feathers & just calling it as ya see it :hatsoff:
 
I can't beleive there is actually debate on what the "conservative" view of the porn buisness is.Is there any doubt that they overwhelmingly think it's bad and destructive of what they view as the moral foundation of America and the world? I just laugh and shake my head when I read posts here from so-called conservatives (your into porn, your not a good conservative lol and they would tell ya so).

Here is just one link that explores their activities on the subject of pornography.



http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn/special/politics.html


"Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, under Republican presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, the federal government went on the offensive against pornography. Then came a Clinton administration that had different priorities. To what extent did the new political environment permit the explosive growth of the porn industry during the 1990s? And how much was due to technological and cultural forces beyond any administration's control? This is where the politics of porn gets complicated."


Feb. 7, 2002

Last May, Janet LaRue, who serves as director of legal activities at the Family Research Council, joined a dozen or so fellow conservative leaders at the Department of Justice on Pennsylvania Avenue. There, in John Ashcroft's private conference room, LaRue, her colleagues, and the attorney general of the United States chatted for an hour or so about hardcore pornography. "He was very attentive, took his own notes, listened, asked good questions," recalls LaRue. "Mr. Ashcroft," she notes approvingly, "reaffirmed his commitment to enforce all of the federal laws on obscenity."

For LaRue -- and for the others in the room, including such veteran anti-pornography activists as Bruce Taylor of the National Law Center for Children and Families, Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family, and Beverly LaHaye of Concerned Women for America -- the meeting with Ashcroft was a watershed. For nearly a decade, they had watched the American pornography business undergo a massive expansion. Not only had porn deluged the Internet and seeped into mainstream movies and TV shows, the adult industry was increasingly (if quietly) being embraced by the corporate world.

For years they had tried to get the Clinton Administration to try and stanch the flow of porn -- starting with purveyors of "hardcore" adult films, which became enormously popular during the 1990s -- under federal obscenity laws. (Legally speaking, all "obscenity" is illegal, but not all porn is necessarily "obscene.") Few prosecutions resulted. "They lent lip service, you know, 'Gee, thank you for the information,'" recalls LaRue. "It was a tragedy," says Patrick Trueman, a former Justice Department prosecutor. "They really did nothing."

Now, Trueman hopes, things will change. During the 2000 presidential campaign George W. Bush promised to "vigorously enforc[e] federal anti-pornography laws," and once in the White House he appointed Ashcroft -- a champion of the religious right -- to head up the nation's law-enforcement apparatus. Sometime soon, they hope, the Justice Department will deliver on President Bush's promise, beginning to actively prosecute new obscenity cases for the first time since Bush's father was in office. With the Justice Department preoccupied with the war on terrorism, "a lot of the industry people, at least, think that the heat's off," says Taylor. "The porn lawyers, the pornographers -- they're counting on institutional paralysis to keep them in business. I hope they're in for a big surprise."
 

Rey C.

Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
I am about as conservative as one gets.
you know, work hard, earn , prosper, live good.
not work hard, get half of it robbed and wasted and given to others, suffer, watch every penny and be stressed out.

To be "about as conservative as one gets", you'd have to tell me that you're a member of the John Birch Society and the GOA, as well as several other groups. Are you in line with those folks? Otherwise... :dunno:

And the traits that you listed, to indicate your conservative nature, actually only tells me that you're somewhere to the left of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. :D


you are just completely off base in this post with your comparisons and generalizations.
mixing politics with religion, its just not accurate.

Actually I think I was pretty accurate, if you're just talking about the post that you quoted. What did I post that you feel was "completely off base"??? My main point was that when one asks about a "conservative", you have to know whether they're asking about a fiscal or a social conservative... or both. There are people who believe in abortion on demand and gay rights, but they may be fiscal conservatives. And (as we saw with the last administration), one can be socially conservative (with respect to foreign policy anyway), and be fiscally rather liberal. Other than some cobbled together tax cuts, Bush's fiscal policy was just the standard demand side, deficit based, Keynesian policy from the 1930's. As I said, some people are just in love with labels and tags... or make believe (Sarah Palin says, "you betcha!"). It may or may not mean anything... hence my "full of shit" remark. Afterall, I can call myself Santa Claus, but don't count on me delivering presents on Christmas Eve. I'll be at home on Christmas morning eating them ham biscuits with my "Jewish" pals. :rofl:


not all consrvatives, actually very few are born again, fundamentalist/Evangelical,
family values yes,which means we dont condome get drunk get high get laid get pregnant get someone else to pay for it.

No where did I say anything about how many (supposed) "conservatives" were actually Evangelicals. What I said was this:
If a person claims to be one of the family values, born again, fundamentalist/Evangelical, social conservatives, this gives a decent glimpse into what their beliefs are (or should be):


But to your claim that:
not all consrvatives, actually very few are born again, fundamentalist/Evangelical
...where is your data coming from to support that claim? I think you're just making a guess.
Yeah? ;) I don't know if that's true or not. But I do know that the religious right is a powerful force within the GOP and has been since the early 1980's. If not, let's see Mitt Romney stroll into Thomas Road Baptist Church and say, "I'm wearing my magic Mormon underwear today and you backwoods Hill Jacks can't stop me from becoming President!!!" Yeah, let me know how that works out. :helpme:


the church is not as influencial in the republican party as people like to make it out to be.

You're confusing a party affiliation with an ideological belief system(s). From the last polling that I read earlier this year, over 40% of Americans considered themselves to be "conservative" leaning. But the number of Americans who identified themselves as "Republican" only numbered in the mid 20% range - the lowest in decades, I believe. You're apparently trying to make that correlation - I'm not.


on the other hand, the synagogue is a huge influence on the democratic.
but we cant talk about that, wouldnt be prudent.

Again, the OP addressed the typical conservative stance on porn. But based on my experience with both parties, I think you'd have a VERY difficult time winning the argument that Jews have any more (or any less) influence on the Democrat party than the Republican party. Not every Jew is a Zionist. And not every Zionist is a Jew. In fact, the most devoted Zionists I have met have been Evangelical fundamentalists. But again, as I see it, none of this has the first thing to do with what the poster was asking.


The only person who I would assume is going to leave me the fuck alone if I want to watch (or make) porn is someone who (truthfully) identifies himself as a strict libertarian. :hatsoff:
 
Who cares? Anyone with a problem with porn probably has a problem with relationships or is scared of their god. Anyone that goes by their political or religious group before hearing the issue is a damn fool. Realizing that you can make up your own mind makes you pretty smart.
 
Last edited:
Top