Bachman Pledges to Ban Pornography

I don't think to say outright that black children were more likely to grow up in a two-parent home in 1860 is actually implying that slavery was better. But there is some lunacy in the document, Bachmann signed. I think it bizarre that "gay marriage" is blamed for inconstancy in heterosexual relationships and families. Having gays in a committed, long-term, caring and mutually spportive family relationship is far better than having them in lifestyles of profligate sexual relationships that don't require committment. But I'm sure these right wing nut jobs believe that by somehow conveying their understanding of Gods's wrath will somehow help gays find the cure and become straight. I'm sure making these attacks on gay marriage gives them a delightful sense of self satisfaction and superiority.
 
Your thread title is a lie... or at very best a personal interpretation of the following statement:

This is in the context of a vow to "honor and cherish, defend and uphold" the institution of marriage... and to do so through:

Among the points is: "Humane protection of women and the innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy - ... from human trafficking, sexual slavery.... and all forms of pornography..." (I'm not retyping the whole thing, I couldn't copy and paste it.)

You can interpret that as banning pornography, but this is a far cry from a vow to ban all porn. This is typical theatrics.

In reply to:
Click to expand...
 
I hope Bachmann does ban pornography.That sickening stuff takes a strong man and makes him weak , make him disrespectful of his wife and mom , and daughters and sisters.It warps the mind and breaks down will power.
Go ahead , make fun of me , but you know it's true.Are you ashamed if someone sees you looking at that garbage? Then it's wrong isn't it !
 
So, sex between hot, consenting women is garbage, but watching people get disemboweled is good old fashioned movie entertainment 14Bevo.

I hope Bachmann also speaks loudly about her views on porn and race- but not for the same reasons you do. Your views will never change- but those of society will, and have long ago.
 
mcbrett , you're right , society's view do change. God is a constant but saociety keeps moving away from him.Pornography , gay marriage , etc. It's disgusting and wrong and should be against the law.
When you stand for nothing , you'll fall for anything my son
 
Prod- freedom of speech- falls under the art umbrella.

14Bevo- I respect your views, just don't share them. Many people consider porn art and entertainment- you have the right to not view it. Others want the right to view it. To each their own.
 
Prod is right ! It all started when aliberal judge wanted to get his freak on! It's disgusting and is ruining good marriages. And gays marrying each other is stupid. even the wird gay is gay
 
I'm a little confused how you guys are equating a statement that calls slavery vile as a yearning to go back and re-establish it. But hey, you're going to read into it whatever you want to believe, so you probably should pick on her propensity to eat children and throw puppies at windmills for sport. I'm pretty sure there was as much of an implication about that as there was an implication that black children of slaves were better off than they are today.

BTW, this is falling into a familiar pattern. Hyperbolic statement called into question, actual documentation requested, documentation ignored in favor of mockery and irrelevant jokes. Well done.
 
The Founding Fathers were real family builders. Thomas Jefferson knocked up one of his slaves a few times and the kids got to be slaves just like mommy. Wouldn't want to break up the family.

I greatly admire the founders of the country but this idolatrous worship of them is ahistorical and disturbing. They were men, just like us, and had serious faults, just like us. They advanced the ball of human liberty by a few centuries and deserve our respect but not our worship.;

Porn is disgusting but once you start banning it, where do you draw the line? I recall in the sixties there were a lot of people that wanted to ban Playboy and did on occasion. Look back at those old issues and you see some great writing, as good as any around at the time, and nudes that are almost as innocent as Hallmark cards.

Bachman is just another puritan nutcase and should be ridiculed as often as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top