Quantcast

Comments about ‘Utah mom takes stand against pornography before Legislature’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, March 1 2013 6:40 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Claudio
Springville, Ut

Re: Aggielove

Your attempt at being more clear was only matched by its being more offensive and inaccurate. I'm sorry you think mental illnesses such as OCD and PTSD are merely petty excuses for people who want to be weak. How insulting to the thousands of military personnel who suffer with PTSD, many of whom have committed suicide.

No wonder some conservatives want to focus the gun debate on mental illness. If they share Aggielove's view on mental illness, it's nothing more than someone making up an excuse for poor behavior.

Most Truthful and Patriotic
Layton, UT

I also do not see pornography in the mall, grocery stores or magazines delivered to our home.

What I do often see, are little girls "performing" in scanty outfits or cheering over the latest Britney Spears clone.

What our society DOES need is a healthy dose of sex education for our children, that takes away the "naughty" so that porn doesn't become something they look for.

The more you make it "naughty", the more "naughty" they want.

Sign me:
65 year old Mom

Harley Rider
Small Town, CT

She should focus attention on a real cause : Like end the Fluoridation of our drinking water * Stopping the conversion of all Farm Lands to Produce POISON ie - GMO Foods * And does she have the X's in her Skies? Those ain't jet trails up in that sky - ChemTrails . Most people have no idea of what I'm posting about , but if they have kids , grandkids they'd better start finding out

kclady53
Baton Rouge, LA

Gee, I wonder if the people opposed Dr. Brown relating the FACTS to us and the legislature feel the same way about sitting in a closed room with a dozen cigarette smokers. Actually, porn is far more dangerous because it not only effects the people viewing it, sexual crimes against innocents increase. Whole industries and empires are built up by its devastating effects – slavery, child kidnapping and abuse, etc. Young people are especially prone to addiction. You keep fighting Dr Brown. You’re right. Porn is no victimless crime. Maybe we could start working on "R" rated movies. That would be nice.

merich39
Salt Lake City, UT

If we outlaw freedom of speech, only outlaws will have freedom of speech.

zabivka
Orem, UT

I don't have a strong opinion about this either way, but would like to point out that the effects of pornography on a group of people are far from conclusive. Even a cursory study of the topic reveals that while some studies have shown correlations between an increase in certain negative behaviors and the use of pornography, other studies have shown just the opposite!

Because of this lack of consensus in pornography studies, as well as the ambiguous, non-standard definition that this woman is using for "pornography" that should be banned, I would oppose this bill.

I would, however, love to get rid of all those check stand magazines, simply because they are ridiculous. :)

ParkCityAggie
Park City, Ut

My point is that lawmakers are not the ones we should be talking to about pornography, anything they try and do will likely get slapped down in court anyway, just like in the past. Remember when we had a porn tzar? How did that turn out? We should be talking to parents and schools, and lets start early rather than later. Education, not (more) repression is the key to success here. Lets start by teaching our children that men and women are both of equal worth, and neither should be objectified, and that there should be mutual respect. I think that is our real problem, there are too many young boys out there who think it's ok to treat girls and Women poorly, and I think it starts in the home! And to be honest, I don't think this state has a very good track record in that regard, just look at our per-capita porn usage in Utah if you don't believe me.

Iolanthe
Providence, UT

There is so much of pornography around us that many have been desensitized to it.

There was a time when the prevailing climate was to give the best advantages to our children and to protect them from predators and salaciousness. This gave more time for children's real tasks English, Math, Language and Arts work skills. Not destroying our children with images that they are not capable of sorting. This is not about what you respond to as prudery but common sense and a protection for our finest product . . ..Our future..

Our High Schools' were not then learning below the level of 8th graders in China. Scotland's High Schools being ahead of our college levels. We were not a nation of consumers. . . but producers. We had Edison and The Wright Brothers.

What are we now? Professional T.V watchers. Filled with useless dark images,degrading images that destroy a desire to accomplish more. We are a nation giving little of use back to the world? Who is really lacking . . . those that protect this stupidity or those who try to get us out of it?

GD
Syracuse, UT

I was shopping in Smith's. My 4 year old grandson was just the right height to be looking at a magazine of a very immodest woman. I asked the manager to cover those up. They did and I've seen several stores who place a piece of cardboard over the part that is offensive. I see nothing wrong with this. Ask parents to teach? Many do but many don't care. I don't know the answer but I think we can do better w/o infringing on anyone's rights.
Gary

Spectre23
West Valley City, UT

Reading these comments makes me think people didn't even read the article first.

NiCiSu
Herriman, UT

I am grateful that a concerned parent went to the trouble to research physiological effects and present them! I fully understand the 1st amendment concerns, and think that we must use a balance of reason here. The line must be drawn when it begins to be harmful to unsuspecting public--especially the youth. Those who embrace pornography will not see the value of placing guidelines on object-oriented photos of the human body, but those who see it for what it is can see the obvious correlation between this type of propaganda and how our children grow up to see others and themselves as only good enough if their body is perfect. It isn't just a sexual issue. Self confidence, self worth and human compassion are on the line. We see an increase in depression, anxiety, and harsh judgement of others when we allow the human body to be seen as an object, and sensual perfection as the ultimate goal.

Lagomorph
Salt Lake City, UT

merich39: "If we outlaw freedom of speech, only outlaws will have freedom of speech."

Let's stretch the 1st/2nd Amendment metaphor a little further. The 1st Amendment can be restated in 2nd Amendment terms as "A well exercised intellect being necessary for the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear ideas shall not be infringed." Ideas here encompasses religious beliefs, information, images, and all words spoken or in print.

Ideas and weapons can be used for both good and ill and a certain amount of infringement on the right to keep and bear either is accepted by most (shouting "fire" in a theater, sawed-off shotguns), but we recognize the necessity to keep both largely unfettered. What Dr. Brown is proposing is the 2nd Amendment equivalent of restricting magazine capacity to a single round-- an extremely stringent restriction on rights to solve a problem. Interpreted that way, I suspect many who have commented in favor of her efforts might reconsider their support. She is seeking a legislative solution to a problem whose solution rightfully belongs in another sphere. Fight bad ideas with good ideas, not idea control laws.

BTW, Harley Rider is a Poe, right?

Sasha Pachev
Provo, UT

A chess game can be lost by moving a seemingly unimportant pawn without realizing that it had a critical defensive role on the square it previously occupied. Looking at the images of the kind discussed in the article is like moving that pawn. When we do we lose individually, we lose in families, we lose as a community, and we lose as a nation. Do not be fooled by those who say a little bit of nudity is no big deal.

merich39
Salt Lake City, UT

My 3 kids are all now in their early 20's. Like any parents, my wife and I were concerned about their exposure to pornography. So instead of petitioning the legislature to protect our children for us, we purchased NetNanny for our home computer. We monitored the programs they watched on T.V. We made sure we didn't subscribe to any cable channels we felt were inappropriate. And we monitored their cell phone use. We communicated to them the dangers of pornography, made clear our expectations of them in this regard, and meted out appropriate discipline if our rules were violated. In other words, we acted as parents, instead of expecting the government to do our jobs for us.

I feel that the task of protecting ones children from pornography is very doable with a small amount of monetary expense and a normal, healthy amount of parental involvement.

minininjatriforceman
American Fork , UT

I think it is very ignorant to think that making it illegal will completely ban it. I believe that if they want to get to it they will. It is another prohabition to me it does not really work.

Razzle2
Bluffdale, UT

I think we should point out that we have come a long long ways since the 60's and 70's. Or perhaps we have forgotten.

When my mom took me to the genealogy library in downtown Salt Lake by bus we passed live street walkers, X-rated theatres, big lighted signs on State promoting topless bars, and scandilly clothed people on billboards pushing cigarettes and hard liquor. It left an impression on my mind, but I am glad to report things are much better today.

AkMama
ANCHORAGE, AK

There is a reason why I don't take my children to the store very often, why I position myself between them and the magazine aisle, why we do little to no shopping in the mall, why we're careful about the internet, the movies we watch and why we almost never turn on the TV. Anyone who doesn't understand the harmful effects this article is talking about is likely either highly desensitized themselves or addicted to porn. Most modern magazine covers of women's magazines, SI swimsuit issue, and the various other magazines on the checkout aisle have some type of inappropriately dressed female (and sometimes male) on the cover, aka softporn, which is a gateway drug. So Two For Flinching, yes, modest clothing on the streets would be very nice. You sarcastically refer to covering all skin and wearing a wetsuit, but keeping breasts, bottoms and the landscape inbetween covered by clothing that is neither sheer nor skintight is not extreme in any way. Teaching women to respect themselves and men to respect women is also not extreme. Pornography? That's extreme.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments