Why Does Porn Get a Pass?

SINthysist

Rural Racist Homophobe
Joined
Nov 29, 2001
Posts
11,940
Gary Aldrich
Thursday, Aug. 29, 2002


Let's talk about the facts of life. It's a fact of life that we have lost the war to control pornography. The war was over years ago when the Supreme Court ruled that porn was legal if it met community standards. Whatever Conservatives or American society in general wished to do about this growing wave of filth has been for naught. It's saddening to admit, but it's true.

During the Reagan administration, I was part of a nationwide effort to try to make a dent in the pornography industry. The FBI had hard evidence that organized crime (OC) had moved into the pornography industry, just as they had into gambling, prostitution and drugs. OC thrives on the vices of humans.

After a year-long undercover case that more than proved the OC connection to porn, we brought forward our indictments. At that time, the community standard that allows federal prosecutions for obscene material gave us the hammer to put away many OC thugs - even the Liberal Miami juries agreed that some of the material being sold was a bit over the top. We fined these sleaze merchants heavily and sent them to the slammer.

You know what? We didn't even make a dent.

Today, that same kind of material is routinely displayed on hundreds of Internet websites advertising their wares in an effort to get you to pay a fee to "peek" inside. What's inside must really be filthy, but if it isn't considered child porn, it won't be prosecuted. Eight years of Bill Clinton in the White House and Janet Reno in the Department of Justice guaranteed that every community standard in the nation has been lowered. Today, both federal and local prosecutions of routine porn are a lost cause.

Whatever objections we had as a society to this porn garbage are moot at this point.

Hundreds of billions of dollars are made each year on the "sales" of horrible things, images that most of us want to keep away not only from our children, but from our communities. We want to keep this material from finding its way into the very fabric of our society. Yet, there is an enormous appetite for this stuff - so much so that it's obvious that the flow from producer to consumer cannot be controlled. Conservatives need to understand this. We have lost this war, but is there something positive that can come from this? Do we just "give up," or is there some way we can curtail the amount of porn being produced?

You bet there is, and here's the answer: Tax the living daylights out of it! Tax every part of it. Tax the consumers who want to look at it. Tax the "actors" - mostly women, and some men - who are making money being "models" for these porn sites. Tax every network that allows this human sewage to flow through their switches, cables, phone lines - tax any entity that makes it easy for this material to go from camera lens to your living room where little Johnny can see it while you're out at the grocery store.

Call it a Porn Tax.

Tax them federally, and tax them at the state level as well. Tax them county and tax them local. Tax them until it hurts, and tax them until they scream. Then, tax them right out of business.

Impossible you say? Wait a minute! Isn't this the reasoning behind the tax on cigarettes? Cigarettes are considered to be a threat to the well being of humans. Is filthy pornography less of a threat to the minds and emotional well-being of humans?

We also tax alcohol heavily, reasoning that a heavy tax keeps the prices up, and thus, maybe out of the hands of too many drunks. As a society, we recognize that booze is not the best way to have a good time, but we acknowledge that it cannot be stopped, so we heavily regulate it, and we tax the grapes out of it!

Why does porn get a pass?

Regulating and taxing cigarettes is not a signal that society approves of the production, distribution and use of tobacco products - just the opposite is true. Our society has begun to frown on the use of cigarettes and has outlawed their use in many public places, including restaurants and bars in some states, yet we throw up our hands and claim impotence in our efforts to control porn. We can't even keep it out of our public libraries! It seems we are unable to think of any solution, so we do nothing.

From now on, unless we have some kind of revolution or the installation of a dictator who has the power to chop off the hands of those who possess or produce porn, it's here, and it's widely available. Get over it! Sure you can regret that we cannot control this. Of course, you can do your best to keep it out of your life. I'm not saying we should give any indication at all that we accept this horrible environment that has been thrust upon us.

Most of us hate this deep injury to our civility. The least we can do is think of some way to lessen it.

Let's face another fact: women are ill-served by allowing themselves to be filmed while performing the most intimate of activities, but they sure aren't victims! There are thousands of them, maybe hundreds of thousands of women, young and old, who for some reason think it's just fine to be a part of this scourge.

Being ill-served and engaging in harmful, risky activity has never stopped prostitutes from doing what they do. Obvious facts about the dangers are not going to stop the actors and actresses from appearing in porn flicks. But, we can lay on a heavy financial burden, just like we tax anyone else who's engaged in a high-profit enterprise. Maybe fewer will be available if we make it tough enough. Let's take away the financial benefit.

At a time when government officials are pulling out all the stops to dream up taxes and penalties that honest, hardworking, decent citizens must pay, this idea seems like a no-brainer. If they can put cameras on tops of poles to catch those who run red lights, don't tell me they can't figure out how to tax porn and all who benefit from it.

Let's tax porn back into the dark alley where it belongs.







A 30-year veteran of the FBI, Gary Aldrich is the author of the best-selling book "Unlimited Access: An FBI Agent Inside the Clinton White House" and founder of The Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty.
 
*yawn*

So what's up, SIN?

(I didn't read this thread. It's too long.)

How's the coffee this morning?

JL:kiss:
 
A little light, but I have to share...

I can condense the whole article into one sentence for you...

Conservatives want to behave like Liberals and Tax Porn...
 
If you don't like it don't look at it. Stay off of my morals and read your Constitution.
 
SINthysist said:
A little light, but I have to share...

I can condense the whole article into one sentence for you...

Conservatives want to behave like Liberals and Tax Porn...

Ok. Thanks for breaking that down for me. That article had too many big words. I get bored easily.

I just finished my third cup of coffee. I think I should stop now..lol

JL:kiss:
 
Is Free Speech Absolute?

Does a Citizen bear a Responsibility to his/her Society?

We are expected to be Responsible when Jury Duty comes around. We are expected to be Responsible in Advertising. We are expected to be Responsible in a Crowded Theater...



Let's forget Westerfield for a second. The other guy, with the two 13 year-old's corpses. What if his favorite reading material went something like this...


"I walked out on stage where a hundred pimply kids were waiting to audition. They looked so small. Tiny, even. I wondered if I should have worn a tie or something, 'cause suddenly I felt way old.

I checked her card, expecting her to be a freshman, probably fifteen years old… She seemed too tiny. But then, they all did.

She was way too young to contemplate anything other than a good late-night jerk-off fantasy. Problem was I knew that I'd never be able to lay back in my bed later that night and conjure up her pretty, young body in my mind, without having first had some actual emotional contact with her.

But this girl was a high school student, and I knew there was no way I could come up with a plausible storyline that ends up with us in bed. But I wanted very much to have that jerk-off session, so I had to try something a little dangerous. I would have to touch her. And not just a brush or two. I would have to touch her for an extended time, feel her skin, maybe even smell her, so I could bring up the sensations later and become aroused. What I came up with was somewhat innocent, a little dirty, and definitely perverted. And I had to be real careful.

I was feeling very perverted, letting my eyes dance all over her.

As the music began I unbuttoned my jeans. No one could see me in the back, it was too dark, and I was behind a table, and I very much needed to readjust Mr. Happy, who had grown considerably since I made contact with Patti. I swear that's all I was planning to do, but the moment I touched the old P-man, he jumped up and grew another inch. Oh yes, I was aroused, and I knew I had to do a little stroking. So I looked around. No one was near. It was dark. I was feeling seriously anxious. So I did it. I pulled my cock out. Jesus, I was so scared someone would come running back to ask me a question and catch me! But no one did. So I kept on stroking. Hidden behind the table I was able to stroke myself off while watching Patti dance."


.... Did anyone murderer or writer at any point bear ANY Responsibility for their actions?
 
You know what?

I just may be getting started :D !

Some morning jolts are better than coffee (tee hee)...
 
Originally posted by SINthysist
Is Free Speech Absolute?

Does a Citizen bear a Responsibility to his/her Society? . . .
If you have to ask these questions, then you don't understand the concept of rights.

If freedom of speech is not absolute, then it's not a right or freedom, now is it? If it is subject to constraint by other then one's own sound judgment, then it is not truly free. Freedom, however, does not absolve one from responsibility for their actions (including offensive speech).

To speak to someone conveying a threat is essentially an offer of harm. That is a form of speech which may have potential legal consequences.

To speak slanderously or libelously of someone is also a speech form that should bear legal ramifications.

To speak in a prejudiced or bigoted manner is a form of speech that while it bears no particular legal burden of accountability, may (and should) bear some social environmental consequences such as disrespect and being shunned by rational, reasonable members of society, i. e., being ostracized.

Perpetual or persistent dishonesty is another form of speech most (I hope) people disdain and one which should lead to social ostracism.

But none of these forms of speech validate the idea of coercive restriction or abrogation of one's right to speak as they wish.

The only responsibility one bears to society is of a negative nature, i. e., to NOT violate the equal rights of his fellow citizens.

And as to why does porn get a pass? For example, in the case of Westerfield, porn didn't kill Danielle, he did.
 
I have to say zealots like that make me nervous. Because he and part of society doesn't like something, it needs to be taxed so hard that it will disappear? What he'd really like to do is make illegal that which has no illegalities to it. A business in which consenting adults make a product which is distributed to other consenting adults.
 
Cigarettes are considered to be a threat to the well being of humans. Is filthy pornography less of a threat to the minds and emotional well-being of humans?...Why does porn get a pass?

Because an argument can be made, strongly, that porn, even in its widest definitions, is expression -- not an argument you can make for cigarettes or alcohol, or anything else upon which you can affix a "sin tax". That's why porn gets a pass.

And stop jerking off to my story, or you'll go blind as well as dopey.
 
Last edited:
Porn gets a pass because the last time it was held after, the detention room was a mess.
 
That's just hunky dory

Typical conservative bullshit. They can't get legislation passed that meets Constitutional muster, so they want to use the power of government (taxes) to impose their own moral standards on everyone else.

These birdbrains need to get a fucking life.
 
SINthysist, why are you a member of this forum which contains...*gasp*...pornography?
 
Re: That's just hunky dory

miles said:
Typical conservative bullshit. They can't get legislation passed that meets Constitutional muster, so they want to use the power of government (taxes) to impose their own moral standards on everyone else.

These birdbrains need to get a fucking life.
Sounds like a fair summary to me.

How the fuck are ya, miles, baby? :kiss:
 
Re: That's just hunky dory

Originally posted by miles
Typical conservative bullshit. They can't get legislation passed that meets Constitutional muster, so they want to use the power of government (taxes) to impose their own moral standards on everyone else.

These birdbrains need to get a fucking life.
Just because a law is allowed to stand by the courts is not a guarantee that it passes Constitutional muster.

A very good recent example was Clinton's retroactive tax increase despite a very clear and specific Constitutional prohibition of ex post facto law.
 
SINthysist said:
VOTE LIBERTARIAN!
This article almost makes me want to do that.

But people love porn and if it ever gets close to being censored as such, the media, porn industry and liberals will fight it. The three of them are too strong for conservatives (who also love porn) to fight.

"The difference between pornography and erotica is lighting."
-Gloria Leonard
 
Back
Top