Ohio Rep. wants to declare porn a public health hazard

11,792 Views | 166 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by TexasScientist
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A young Republican lawmaker is sponsoring a resolution to declare pornography a "public health hazard" in the state of Ohio.

Ohio State Rep. Jena Powell, who was 24 years old when she was elected last year, told CBN News that her resolution highlights the research-based adversities of pornography:

"We have hundreds of studies that show the correlation between pornography and its negative effects on men, and it's leading to the abuse of women. Eighty-eight percent of pornography shows violence towards women, and of that 88 percent, 95 percent of it shows a positive or neutral reaction from women. It's increasing a culture of violence."

House Resolution 180 resolves to "declare that pornography is a public health hazard with statewide and national public health impacts leading to a broad spectrum of individual and societal harms," per the resolution's draft.

Powell explained that the resolution does not aim to outlaw pornography, but rather that she hopes the research and testimonies associated with this resolution will change the hearts of society and the way it views human dignity.

Article: https://www.disrn.com/2019/10/03/ohio-rep-wants-to-declare-porn-a-public-health-hazard/
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I long for simpler days back when you had to pay for porn and water was free!
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"

-- Barack Obama
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Is violence against women increasing in the US?

Edit: some numbers say no. From the WH:
Women are less likely than men to be victims of crime. As overall crime rates have
fallen in the United States, the likelihood of victimization has declined.
The probability of being a victim of a violent crime (assault, robbery, or homicide) has
declined among both men and women in the last two decades
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Does this include Midget porn? Or just cuckolds, ****s and a2m?

I'd like to hear from a Midget if this is bad.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
When all the laughter dies down.....folks will realize .....pornography is in fact a health hazard .

BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Is violence against women increasing in the US?

Edit: some numbers say no. From the WH:
Women are less likely than men to be victims of crime. As overall crime rates have
fallen in the United States, the likelihood of victimization has declined.
The probability of being a victim of a violent crime (assault, robbery, or homicide) has
declined among both men and women in the last two decades
Are you taking a pro pornography position or are you just taking issue with a claim she made?
If it is the former, I would like to hear your reasons why you think the availability of ubiquitous porn is good for our society?
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tommie said:

Does this include Midget porn? Or just cuckolds, ****s and a2m?

I'd like to hear from a Midget if this is bad.
I would like to hear your reasons why you think the availability of ubiquitous porn is good for our society?
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

quash said:

Is violence against women increasing in the US?

Edit: some numbers say no. From the WH:
Women are less likely than men to be victims of crime. As overall crime rates have
fallen in the United States, the likelihood of victimization has declined.
The probability of being a victim of a violent crime (assault, robbery, or homicide) has
declined among both men and women in the last two decades
Are you taking a pro pornography position or are you just taking issue with a claim she made?
If it is the former, I would like to hear your reasons why you think the availability of ubiquitous porn is good for our society?

I think porn is one of those personal responsibility things. I am pleased this young woman did not introduce legislation.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

BaylorFTW said:

quash said:

Is violence against women increasing in the US?

Edit: some numbers say no. From the WH:
Women are less likely than men to be victims of crime. As overall crime rates have
fallen in the United States, the likelihood of victimization has declined.
The probability of being a victim of a violent crime (assault, robbery, or homicide) has
declined among both men and women in the last two decades
Are you taking a pro pornography position or are you just taking issue with a claim she made?
If it is the former, I would like to hear your reasons why you think the availability of ubiquitous porn is good for our society?

I think porn is one of those personal responsibility things. I am pleased this young woman did not introduce legislation.
Ok, but it is clearly addictive to many. We place restrictions on alcohol, tobacco, prostitution, marijuana, etc. Why is it so unreasonable to do the same with porn? Remember there was a time in our history when we did restrict it. Now, that we know that a lot of the so called science by Kinsey has been proven to be bunk which was the catalyst for lifting the laws in the first place, shouldn't we be bringing the laws back or at the very least having a serious conversation about doing so? It is still unclear to me how we are helped by having free, ubiquitous porn where even children can gain access to it. In fact, it seems pretty clear it harms some people and society as a result.
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

quash said:

Is violence against women increasing in the US?

Edit: some numbers say no. From the WH:
Women are less likely than men to be victims of crime. As overall crime rates have
fallen in the United States, the likelihood of victimization has declined.
The probability of being a victim of a violent crime (assault, robbery, or homicide) has
declined among both men and women in the last two decades
Are you taking a pro pornography position or are you just taking issue with a claim she made?
If it is the former, I would like to hear your reasons why you think the availability of ubiquitous porn is good for our society?
Is porn really that much more evil than a political party talking point such as abortion or gun control? Is the obsession of your position any more destructive to society? I don't know. Would those that did not have access to porn commit more sex crimes? I really don't know. Just asking the question.
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"

-- Barack Obama
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

quash said:

BaylorFTW said:

quash said:

Is violence against women increasing in the US?

Edit: some numbers say no. From the WH:
Women are less likely than men to be victims of crime. As overall crime rates have
fallen in the United States, the likelihood of victimization has declined.
The probability of being a victim of a violent crime (assault, robbery, or homicide) has
declined among both men and women in the last two decades
Are you taking a pro pornography position or are you just taking issue with a claim she made?
If it is the former, I would like to hear your reasons why you think the availability of ubiquitous porn is good for our society?

I think porn is one of those personal responsibility things. I am pleased this young woman did not introduce legislation.
Ok, but it is clearly addictive to many. We place restrictions on alcohol, tobacco, prostitution, marijuana, etc. Why is it so unreasonable to do the same with porn? Remember there was a time in our history when we did restrict it. Now, that we know that a lot of the so called science by Kinsey has been proven to be bunk which was the catalyst for lifting the laws in the first place, shouldn't we be bringing the laws back or at the very least having a serious conversation about doing so? It is still unclear to me how we are helped by having free, ubiquitous porn where even children can gain access to it. In fact, it seems pretty clear it harms some people and society as a result.

Just because a tiny minority mix harm with porn is no reason to get the state involved. We regulate it like those other things, by age.

“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Eighty-eight percent of pornography shows violence towards women"

What the F?????
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

Is porn really that much more evil than a political party talking point such as abortion or gun control?
I don't know where this evil ranks on a list of evils. But I know it is a problem for our society and one we could easily do something about.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:


Is the obsession of your position any more destructive to society? I don't know.
I don't know what this means. I am not going to stop caring about people or our society. This isn't about politics. This is about wanting better for people, my community, my culture, etc..

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:


Would those that did not have access to porn commit more sex crimes? I really don't know. Just asking the question.
I think what you would find is that access to porn causes more people to go further down the rabbit hole. In other words, it converts a percentage of people into sexual predators. The reason is it starts to blur the line between fantasy and reality and it starts to give such people ideas on how to act out fantasies and even fantasies to have that are violent in nature.

Our societies managed to get along fine without porn in its modern form in the past. I think we would manage fine without its ubiquity. I don't buy that a lack of access to porn causes sex crimes. I strongly suggest you read Libido Dominandi by E. Michael Jones who gives a good overview of pornography and sexual liberation in the historical context.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

Is porn really that much more evil than a political party talking point such as abortion or gun control?
I don't know where this evil ranks on a list of evils. But I know it is a problem for our society and one we could easily do something about.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:


Is the obsession of your position any more destructive to society? I don't know.
I don't know what this means. I am not going to stop caring about people or our society. This isn't about politics. This is about wanting better for people, my community, my culture, etc..

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:


Would those that did not have access to porn commit more sex crimes? I really don't know. Just asking the question.
I think what you would find is that access to porn causes more people to go further down the rabbit hole. In other words, it converts a percentage of people into sexual predators. The reason is it starts to blur the line between fantasy and reality and it starts to give such people ideas on how to act out fantasies and even fantasies to have that are violent in nature.

Our societies managed to get along fine without porn in its modern form in the past. I think we would manage fine without its ubiquity. I don't buy that a lack of access to porn causes sex crimes. I strongly suggest you read Libido Dominandi by E. Michael Jones who gives a good overview of pornography and sexual liberation in the historical context.


It is not your job, BaylorFTW, to decide whether or not I should own guns, whether my wife can have an abortion, or whether or not I can watch porn. The law of the land says all three are legal. We have one Judge, and you are not Him.
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"

-- Barack Obama
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:


Just because a tiny minority mix harm with porn is no reason to get the state involved. We regulate it like those other things, by age.


How do you know it is just a tiny minority that his harmed by pornography? I suspect if they actually did the research they would find the harmful effects are widespread. And you would find varying levels of harm as well from very serious to simply robbing people of their ability to form more rewarding relationships in society and/or being more productive members of society. But even in the latter instances, it is still a loss for all of us. As we are all connected.

The only real regulation is with regard to child pornography. And thank God for that. Other regulation is easy to get around. Any kid with a computer with basic computer knowledge could find ways around simple age restrictions. I think a better compromise would be to force people to pay for pornography again with some age restrictions and ban free forms of it. This would make it a more conscious decision for people to where they really have to decide they want it. This would reduce as many younger people from consuming and also cause people to decide what they want rather than having things thrust upon them that they wouldn't otherwise consciously choose especially if they had to pay for it. The issue isn't just porn itself but some of the darker subjects and morally compromising situations that are promoted.
fubar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack Bauer said:

"Eighty-eight percent of pornography shows violence towards women"

What the F?????
Same reaction to that claim here.
Gunter gleiben glauchen globen
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

It is not your job, BaylorFTW, to decide whether or not I should own guns, whether my wife can have an abortion, or whether or not I can watch porn. The law of the land says all three are legal. We have one Judge, and you are not Him.
Why is watching porn so important to you? This isn't a freedoms issue. This is a public health hazard issue. Do you really think that God would be supporting ubiquitous porn that is encouraging adultery in your heart by lusting after women (or men) on a computer screen?

And with regard to abortion, some judges took away the voice of the people to make that change. The people didn't want abortion at that time. Such a change should have been left up to the people.

It is clear there are problems caused by pornography. At the very least, I don't see any reason why this subject shouldn't be researched further to find out the extent of them. We research every other issue except this one.
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

It is not your job, BaylorFTW, to decide whether or not I should own guns, whether my wife can have an abortion, or whether or not I can watch porn. The law of the land says all three are legal. We have one Judge, and you are not Him.
Why is watching porn so important to you? This isn't a freedoms issue. This is a public health hazard issue. Do you really think that God would be supporting ubiquitous porn that is encouraging adultery in your heart by lusting after women (or men) on a computer screen?

And with regard to abortion, some judges took away the voice of the people to make that change. The people didn't want abortion at that time. Such a change should have been left up to the people.

It is clear there are problems caused by pornography. At the very least, I don't see any reason why this subject shouldn't be researched further to find out the extent of them. We research every other issue except this one.
Whether or not John Q. Public is watching porn is the very least of our problems. The dishonesty, debauchery, and influence peddling that has gone on in Washington, D.C. is sickening!!!! Let's fix that first and then we'll work on porn.
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"

-- Barack Obama
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This guy needs some porn.

BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

BaylorFTW said:

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

It is not your job, BaylorFTW, to decide whether or not I should own guns, whether my wife can have an abortion, or whether or not I can watch porn. The law of the land says all three are legal. We have one Judge, and you are not Him.
Why is watching porn so important to you? This isn't a freedoms issue. This is a public health hazard issue. Do you really think that God would be supporting ubiquitous porn that is encouraging adultery in your heart by lusting after women (or men) on a computer screen?

And with regard to abortion, some judges took away the voice of the people to make that change. The people didn't want abortion at that time. Such a change should have been left up to the people.

It is clear there are problems caused by pornography. At the very least, I don't see any reason why this subject shouldn't be researched further to find out the extent of them. We research every other issue except this one.
Whether or not John Q. Public is watching porn is the very least of our problems. The dishonesty, debauchery, and influence peddling that has gone on in Washington, D.C. is sickening!!!! Let's fix that first and then we'll work on porn.
How do you know if it is the least of our problems? Maybe if people weren't sedating themselves with porn and other drugs, they would be more highly motivated to take on the other issues you are talking about. How do you know that ubiquitous porn isn't political control in the first place?
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tommie said:

This guy needs some porn.
You want to do anything but talk about the issue seriously as Canada2017 said earlier.
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

BaylorFTW said:

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

It is not your job, BaylorFTW, to decide whether or not I should own guns, whether my wife can have an abortion, or whether or not I can watch porn. The law of the land says all three are legal. We have one Judge, and you are not Him.
Why is watching porn so important to you? This isn't a freedoms issue. This is a public health hazard issue. Do you really think that God would be supporting ubiquitous porn that is encouraging adultery in your heart by lusting after women (or men) on a computer screen?

And with regard to abortion, some judges took away the voice of the people to make that change. The people didn't want abortion at that time. Such a change should have been left up to the people.

It is clear there are problems caused by pornography. At the very least, I don't see any reason why this subject shouldn't be researched further to find out the extent of them. We research every other issue except this one.
Whether or not John Q. Public is watching porn is the very least of our problems. The dishonesty, debauchery, and influence peddling that has gone on in Washington, D.C. is sickening!!!! Let's fix that first and then we'll work on porn.
How do you know if it is the least of our problems? Maybe if people weren't sedating themselves with porn and other drugs, they would be more highly motivated to take on the other issues you are talking about. How do you know that ubiquitous porn isn't political control in the first place?
So porn is a political tool against humanity??? Sheesh!!!! You make Mike Pence sound like a Hellraiser!
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"

-- Barack Obama
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

So porn is a political tool against humanity??? Sheesh!!!! You make Mike Pence sound like a Hellraiser!
Go read Libido Dominandi and get back to me. If it is such an outlandish claim, it should be easy for you to pick apart.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

tommie said:

This guy needs some porn.
You want to do anything but talk about the issue seriously as Canada2017 said earlier.


FTW, there's not an issue. (Or at least not an issue that you've given me cause to be concerned with). For example, you posted a stat of "88%" of porn shows violence towards women. (Does that include gay porn, lesbian porn, individual porn and soft porn?)

My uncommon sense dismisses that number and makes me question if this is an issue I should devote seriousness to or should my outrage remain with cat juggling?
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

It is not your job, BaylorFTW, to decide whether or not I should own guns, whether my wife can have an abortion, or whether or not I can watch porn. The law of the land says all three are legal. We have one Judge, and you are not Him.
Why is watching porn so important to you? This isn't a freedoms issue. This is a public health hazard issue. Do you really think that God would be supporting ubiquitous porn that is encouraging adultery in your heart by lusting after women (or men) on a computer screen?

And with regard to abortion, some judges took away the voice of the people to make that change. The people didn't want abortion at that time. Such a change should have been left up to the people.

It is clear there are problems caused by pornography. At the very least, I don't see any reason why this subject shouldn't be researched further to find out the extent of them. We research every other issue except this one.

There's a ton of research on porn and it doesn't show a public health hazard.

Also, keep your govt out of the market. If free porn is working profitably the state has no business demanding an entry fee.

If you think too many people are watching porn then persuade them to stop. Don't use govt force to make your point, use a better argument.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Has anyone seen that porno with the midget conjoined twins?

It was hot! These girls can throw down!
RD2WINAGNBEAR86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This thread reminds me of one of my favorite jokes: The Peach Box Story.

A little old lady calls her local police department complaining about the pornographic movies being shown at the drive inn theater behind her house. After her multiple complaints, they dispatch an officer to her house. After taking her statement, they walk into the backyard. The officer immediately notices she has an eight foot tall solid wooden fence all the way around. He says "Ma'am, you are only five feet tall. I don't think you can see over that fence!". She responds " That is not true officer. See that peach box over there by the fence? If you stand on it you can see over the fence just fine! "

AckAckAckAck!!!!! I just love that one.
"Never underestimate Joe's ability to **** things up!"

-- Barack Obama
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack Bauer said:

"Eighty-eight percent of pornography shows violence towards women"

What the F?????


I can't take this movement seriously until someone can explain this stat.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack Bauer said:

Jack Bauer said:

"Eighty-eight percent of pornography shows violence towards women"

What the F?????


I can't take this movement seriously until someone can explain this stat.


Maybe this will help. Last night I was watching this porn on the hub. It was called "black guys on black guys", (I didn't want to contribute to violence against women). Anyhow, these two black guys meet up with two white but they're wearing blackface.

fubar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
But now you're contributing to black-on-black violence.
Gunter gleiben glauchen globen
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Is anyone (other than me) into disability porn? I was on the hub the other day watching this feature named "Art and Matt". Art doesn't have arms nor legs. Neither does Matt. It's a sensitive live story.
fubar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Didn't they start out as a Penthouse Forum documentary?

"You may not believe this, but this story is 100% true. I was attending a small church-affiliated school in the southwest, I'm a quad amputee ... call me 'Art' ...."
Gunter gleiben glauchen globen
BaylorFTW
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:


There's a ton of research on porn and it doesn't show a public health hazard.
I would like you to support this claim with evidence. I just did a simple internet search on Amazon and found the following:
https://www.amazon.com/Your-Brain-Porn-Pornography-Addiction/dp/B078SH63V2/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=pornography&qid=1570395113&s=books&sr=1-2
https://www.amazon.com/Porn-Myth-Exposing-Reality-Pornography/dp/162164006X/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=pornography&qid=1570395158&s=books&sr=1-3
https://www.amazon.com/Wired-Intimacy-Pornography-Hijacks-Brain/dp/0830837000/ref=sr_1_7?keywords=pornography&qid=1570395158&s=books&sr=1-7

quash said:


Also, keep your govt out of the market. If free porn is working profitably the state has no business demanding an entry fee.
What market? It is the Wild West with almost no regulation.
Again, we regulate alcohol, drugs, tobacco, prostitution, etc You still need to prove that pornography isn't harmful for this argument to make sense. If it is unclear by the evidence, research should be done to find out.

quash said:


If you think too many people are watching porn then persuade them to stop. Don't use govt force to make your point, use a better argument.
Trying to get addicts to stop an addiction is an uphill battle. Their mind is corrupted by the drug and they become slaves to their desires. In other words, they aren't thinking straight. This is the very reason you do regulate these things because people are hindered from using logic and reason. Instead, of looking at the issue objectively, they try to rationalize the addiction. Just look at how people are responding in this thread who are pro pornography.
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fubar said:

Didn't they start out as a Penthouse Forum documentary?

"You may not believe this, but this story is 100% true. I was attending a small church-affiliated school in the southwest, I'm a quad amputee ... call me 'Art' ...."


I remember reading that. It was about 1984. At the time, believed it was that Phi Delt who lived on Speight. I found him engaging.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BaylorFTW said:

quash said:


There's a ton of research on porn and it doesn't show a public health hazard.
I would like you to support this claim with evidence. I just did a simple internet search on Amazon and found the following:
https://www.amazon.com/Your-Brain-Porn-Pornography-Addiction/dp/B078SH63V2/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=pornography&qid=1570395113&s=books&sr=1-2
https://www.amazon.com/Porn-Myth-Exposing-Reality-Pornography/dp/162164006X/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=pornography&qid=1570395158&s=books&sr=1-3
https://www.amazon.com/Wired-Intimacy-Pornography-Hijacks-Brain/dp/0830837000/ref=sr_1_7?keywords=pornography&qid=1570395158&s=books&sr=1-7

quash said:


Also, keep your govt out of the market. If free porn is working profitably the state has no business demanding an entry fee.
What market? It is the Wild West with almost no regulation.
Again, we regulate alcohol, drugs, tobacco, prostitution, etc You still need to prove that pornography isn't harmful for this argument to make sense. If it is unclear by the evidence, research should be done to find out.

quash said:


If you think too many people are watching porn then persuade them to stop. Don't use govt force to make your point, use a better argument.
Trying to get addicts to stop an addiction is an uphill battle. Their mind is corrupted by the drug and they become slaves to their desires. In other words, they aren't thinking straight. This is the very reason you do regulate these things because people are hindered from using logic and reason. Instead, of looking at the issue objectively, they try to rationalize the addiction. Just look at how people are responding in this thread who are pro pornography.


40 million Americans are regular users if porn. 200,000 are addicts. One half of one percent. Not a public health issue for the state.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.