Last week, several GOP congresspeople accidentally started a culture conflagration on Twitter when they sent a letter to Attorney General William Barr, asking him to fight porn online.
The letter, which was signed by Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and three others, called on using existing obscenity laws to go after pornographers, noting that in 2016 President Donald Trump signed an anti-pornography pledge.
The four want Barr “to declare the prosecution of obscene pornography a criminal justice priority,” saying porn has just gotten too dang hot.
“The Internet and other evolving technologies are fueling the explosion of obscene pornography by making it more accessible and visceral,” they wrote.
Last weekend, it opened up a fracture among conservatives. On one hand, you have cultural conservatives, who do believe the proliferation of porn is a moral crisis and that the government has an obligation to prevent it. It’s not too far away from their beliefs on the government outlawing abortion.
On the other hand, limited government conservatives are worried about censorship and infringement on speech.
On Twitter, the fight played out between the Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh and … just about everyone else who was alright with porn.
This is a great move and conservatives who act perplexed at the suggestion that government might have a role in restricting hardcore porn obviously do not understand their own ideology. This is, at the very least, an idea worth discussing. https://t.co/gMWWf1RRwS
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) December 6, 2019
“This is a great move and conservatives who act perplexed at the suggestion that government might have a role in restricting hardcore porn obviously do not understand their own ideology. This is, at the very least, an idea worth discussing,” he wrote—which led to a number of detractors, who regardless of whether they approved of porn, didn’t approve of the government stepping in and saying what could and couldn’t be produced.
*sigh* Porn of any kind is not good for anyone. Nevertheless, in a FREE society, people are allowed to make their own decisions. I would suggest that if you don't want Big Brother controlling the things you like, then don't don't have Big Brother controlling what you don't like. https://t.co/zx2c8v9h5P
— AstroNerdBoy (@AstroNerdBoy) December 6, 2019
https://twitter.com/ChiSportsHomer/status/1203029630892085249
But the good folks at the Daily Wire were not to be disagreed with.
Porn, they said, was (and here’s where things went off the rails a bit), essentially the equivalent of legalized prostitution?
Porn defenders essentially argue that prostitution should be legal as long as there is a camera in the room and the act is published on the internet for general consumption. I find this argument not only mistaken but bewildering in its incoherence.
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) December 8, 2019
https://twitter.com/brad_polumbo/status/1203720206935310337
https://twitter.com/AmandaPresto/status/1203691963981148166
Others in the conservative movement wondered what the Founding Fathers would think of streamin’ a little sex on a smartphone?
Were they talking about doing it at the constitutional convention? We will never know.
Is there a persuasive originalist argument that the First Amendment protects hard-core porn? I’ve never seen it as encompassed within the Founders’ conception of “the freedom of speech.” I’m with Bork on this: pic.twitter.com/idIm3hYWBZ
— David French (@DavidAFrench) December 8, 2019
And if porn is speech, does that mean masturbating in public is speech?
If porn is “speech” then a man masturbating in a public park is engaged in speech, and two people having sex on their front lawn in broad daylight is speech, and pretty much any act is speech, and the concept of free speech has no discernible meaning
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) December 8, 2019
(It’s not.)
Holy fuck this is dumb. If you can't see the difference between watching porn and masturbating in public, then that says A LOT more about you than it does everyone else. https://t.co/dF4g7qE0cA
— Di'Rico L. Baker (@DiRico_Rants) December 8, 2019
But is banning porn nanny-state overreach? Many on the culturally conservative side would argue that most conservatives now are libertarians and not conservatives. Conservatives want the government to intervene for the moral good, they say.
Some dudes get super angry when you question their right to watch other people have sex on the internet. It’s pretty sad and pathetic. I’m not saying you have to agree with my arguments but getting emotional in your defense of hardcore porn is weird to me.
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) December 7, 2019
To be clear: With this logic, you are arguing that anything that isn’t suitable for children should be banned from the internet. https://t.co/s4kWuOruMZ
— Kat Timpf (@KatTimpf) December 7, 2019
https://twitter.com/thecjpearson/status/1203424973630722049
We have raised an entire generation to believe that conservatism and libertarianism are synonymous.
— Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) December 8, 2019
They are not. https://t.co/doCO3Osld5
Some even considered ditching the entire libertarian ethos over the sins of porn.
https://twitter.com/campusevangel/status/1203771815224643588
But for a great number of internet users, the biggest issue was not pornography, but a bunch of conservatives arguing about it and clogging up the timeline with porn talk.
While white nationalists are obsessing over pornography, it's worth noting that, if you advocate racial purity, you can't avoid talking about reproduction & therefore mandating a very restrictive kind of sexual ideology. Short version: they really want to control women's bodies.
— Weltschmerz à Gogo (@ThatWeltschmerz) December 9, 2019
https://twitter.com/AmberSmokesWeed/status/1203747702225416192
If only the government could step up and ban that instead.
READ MORE:
