“We can both look at different research etc, etc,…

You may defend pornography. That is certainly your right. But I cannot.”

I’m not asking you to defend pornography, I’m asking you to defend your claim about pornography. And we can look at the same research, if you cite it.

I don’t really understand why pornography isn’t regarded as free speech, in the first place. It’s not really differentiable from protected speech by anything but the most arbitrary and contentious terms, as numerous court cases have proven. I know many people who enjoy consuming pornography, and some who produce it, and I don’t see why their pleasures and livelihoods have any lesser deserve of protection because others have a personal moral opposition to it.

I understand this is perhaps slightly off topic and this blog is highlighting the connection between the anti-pornography bill and the anti-homosexuality bill — but it seems contradictory to argue that people deserve their freedom of conscience concerning the latter and not the former.

I think you were searching for ‘voila’ not ‘viola’…although I did manufacture a hilarious Gilda Radner moment in my mind over your word choice.

LOL

Good catch.

As a side note .. On the positive side … if this bill is created and passed I guess it will curb Ssempsa from showing audiences gay porn on his laptop