Michelle Bachmann Ban On Porn?

Ms Bachmann within the past few weeks has already signed a pledge in Iowa regarding something about preserving marriage, that *clearly* on the very first page said that black children were better off during slavery than they are now. Something about slave families being more stable than present day free black families. Ya, right....

Anyone who votes for that Christaliban control freak needs to have their head examined. What happened to keeping the government off our backs and reducing regulations? That mindset must pertain only to giving big business tax breaks and subsidies, but does not apply to anything having to do with sexual behavior 'they' do not approve of including porn, adultery, gay marriage, and abortion.

They want freedom - as in the freedom to force their religious beliefs on everyone else.

"I strongly believe in women having access to safe and legal abortions, but she shuts down one of my favorite comebacks to people who are anti-choice "How many unwanted children have you taken in and raised?"
She can pipe up "23 thank you very much" - that's impressive.
I haven't had time to do it yet, but I was interested in reading up more on her foster parenting." (mtnlaurel)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes.....definitely do more research. Because it would be impressive, if it were actually true in any real sense. There probably HAVE been several dozen foster children over the years , but but many sources have pointed out that some of them were with her family for a week to a month, none were actually "raised" by her, and while she IS to be commended for opening her home to foster children at all, the numbers and the length of time she fostered any of them belie her comments about having "raised 23 foster children. As politicians are prone to do, the exaggeration level about this subject is extreme, so should be taken with a grain of salt.

Although, I DO commend her for being involved at all.

,,,,,i see the media trashing of a candidate with conversative values has began. I saw the news last night. Talk about biased.....

Foster children tend not to be raised by any one foster parent for their entire childhood, yet it's not at all inaccurate to say that a foster parent has raised a foster child for whatever amount of time that foster child is with them. I was a short-term foster parent for several years, which meant that most of the children who were placed with me were there for only a few days, and few were with me for more than a few months. One boy was with me from the age of seven through twenty, years after he had left the foster program, but I actually had to receive a separate license provision in order for him to remain with me that long.

Most of the kids who were with me were placed with me by police departments, often after the parents had been arrested, injured, killed or whatever, and they remained with me only until the child welfare workers could find a long-term placement. No, I didn't really think about each of these kids as if I had "raised" them, especially since I don't even remember most of their names, but I don't think that it would be inaccurate for someone who has a foster child for a year or more to consider that they have helped raise them. Someone raised them and if there is no one person to whom this can be assigned, it has to be said that a number of parents raised them.

would masturbation also be illegal?

banning porn would be great - but we have freedom of the press - and with the good comes the smut. As long as their is demand, their will be porn, unfortunately, the demand is growing thanks to the internet.

Yes, that darn first amendment is always getting in the way at the most inconvenient times. And that's probably a really really good thing since it often also gets in the way of nefarious plans by people within the government as much as for people outside it. Who knows what different trajectory our country might have gone on if the pentagon papers hadn't ever been published or if watergate had been successfully suppressed. As much as I may not agree with what the KKK or Westboro Baptist Church has to say, I very much value their right to say it. Porn may not be as important as teh pentagon papers, but until someone can convince me that it'll cause the literal downfall of this country I will equally support the first amendment right of people to produce and consume it.

Personally I'm leaning more and more libertarian as I get older. The idea that the government needs to protect us from ourselves gets more and more annoying as the days go by. If I didn't want porn in my life I'd simply stop watching it and I'd sever ties with anyone in my life that consumed it if I felt that their use of it affected me negatively. Problem solved without the government treating everyone like a 3 year old that needs to be babysat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jp1

Yes, that darn first amendment is always getting in the way at the most inconvenient times. And that's probably a really really good thing since it often also gets in the way of nefarious plans by people within the government as much as for people outside it. Who knows what different trajectory our country might have gone on if the pentagon papers hadn't ever been published or if watergate had been successfully suppressed. As much as I may not agree with what the KKK or Westboro Baptist Church has to say, I very much value their right to say it.

---

Much as I despise the Westboro people, the private action to separate them from the bereaved has been far better (and more honorable) than simple banning by the Government.

From an amoral view, one of the bigger drivers in both computer development and the Internet are video games and porn. On the porn front, it wasn't amazon.com and youtube at the forefront of ecommerce and streaming video.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jp1

Yes, that darn first amendment is always getting in the way at the most inconvenient times. And that's probably a really really good thing since it often also gets in the way of nefarious plans by people within the government as much as for people outside it. Who knows what different trajectory our country might have gone on if the pentagon papers hadn't ever been published or if watergate had been successfully suppressed. As much as I may not agree with what the KKK or Westboro Baptist Church has to say, I very much value their right to say it. Porn may not be as important as teh pentagon papers, but until someone can convince me that it'll cause the literal downfall of this country I will equally support the first amendment right of people to produce and consume it.

Personally I'm leaning more and more libertarian as I get older. The idea that the government needs to protect us from ourselves gets more and more annoying as the days go by. If I didn't want porn in my life I'd simply stop watching it and I'd sever ties with anyone in my life that consumed it if I felt that their use of it affected me negatively. Problem solved without the government treating everyone like a 3 year old that needs to be babysat.

---

We are the government and the government is us. We do need our elected representatives to aggressively and actively 'protect us from us' or people like Michelle Backman will gain power and ban whatever they don't happen to like. Or big companies will pollute at will like they do in China, or 'pad' the baby formula with questionable fillers, to name just a few. Business is in the business of making money, and to that end won't police themselves if not watched.
That goes for congress. We need to hold them accountable, and make sure we are protected from such nonsense like this. She and her many pledges (is there any pledge she hasn't signed?) need to be seen for what they are, and soundly ridiculed.