Last month a U.S. District Court judge issued a permanent injunction against a South Carolina law prohibiting sexually-oriented advertising within one mile of public highways. Similar advertising bans have failed in Kansas and Missouri. These cases hinge on the idea that the government cannot prohibit lawful advertising for a lawfully run business.
The real question is whether or not sexually-oriented businesses operate legally. The presumption under the law is that they do. It takes a specific citizen complaint or police investigation to start the process to determine otherwise and even then, no one or no business is guilty until so found by a jury in a court trial.
However, many who have investigated, worked in, or frequented such business know they sometimes violate local laws ranging from obscenity violations to drug crimes, prostitution offenses and building and health code violations. If General McMaster wants to curtail the influence of sexually-oriented businesses, he should worry less about their signs and investigate the businesses themselves. He might be surprised at what he finds.
Learn more about what some have discovered at strip clubs and porn shops.
Apparently public morality can still serve as a basis for regulating commercial activity. So says the Alabama Supreme Court in a case upholding the state’s obscenity law. At issue was a store’s advertisement for sexual devices. The court ruled such advertising was neither private nor consensual.
The U.S. Supreme Court held in Stanley vs. Georgia that private possession of obscene material was protected under the Constitution, but that such a private right for individuals did not translate into the right for someone else to transport, distribute, sell or otherwise disseminate it. As “Love Stuff” in Alabama found out, it’s legal to own it, but not legal to sell it.
Yesterday’s post raised objections. A few felt my attack on “all Americans” was too extreme and a bit un-American. Was I over the top?
Oppenheimer spoke with the knowledge that his actions unleashed an irreversible change to the world. The best available research suggest that 70 percent of the world’s pornography is still produced in the United States. Our nation collectively has unleashed untold damage on individuals, families and cultures throughout the world. I think the analogy fits.
Yet, is it fair to indict average Americans who have no taste for pornography? Consider this: we live in a democratic Republic in which elected representatives conduct the daily affairs of governance, but WE THE PEOPLE run the show. We the people have passed laws prohibiting the distribution of obscene pornography and zoning laws to restrict the negative impact of sexually-oriented businesses. We the people have the obligation to make sure our laws are enforced. But, we the people have not taken the actions we could to reduce the harm of pornography.
Inaction alone may not count you among the “destroyers of world,” but if we oppose the exporting of sexual violence, we must ask if there is something we can personally do to help stop it. Have you spoken with your police chief or district attorney’s office? Have you written your Congressman or U.S. Attorney to ask why the law isn’t being enforced? Have you taken steps to curtail the insatiable demand for this material – stopped consuming porn yourself or helped another out of their own addiction? For some, the answer will be “yes. “ For most, I fear it is “no.”
If average citizens can derail Obama’s agenda on spending and healthcare, we can at least try to put an end to illegal pornography. Do we care enough to act?
You might want to sit down for this one. Then again, you probably don’t read standing up. Just prepare yourself. A BBC reporter investigating the pornography industry recounts how his trip from the heart of darkness (Los Angeles, of course) to a remote Ghanian village finally revealed the terrible impact of pornography to him. He writes:
The village has no electricity, but that doesn’t stop a generator from being wheeled in, turning a mud hut into an impromptu porn cinema – and turning some young men into rapists, with villagers relating chilling stories of assaults taking place straight after the film’s end.
After detonating the first atomic bomb, Dr. Oppenheimer reportedly quoted this line from the Bhagavad-Gita: “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”
All Americans should chant this collectively. We destroy the world with our pornography and praise ourselves for protecting so-called free speech. Except, obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. Much of the destruction we export could be stopped if we simply enforced our laws. Is anybody listening?
One final note: This reporter seems to indicate that the worst thing about American porn is that the “actors” aren’t wearing condoms. This is no small matter in AIDS-ravaged Africa, but sexual assault, the humiliation of women, and all-around perversity of pornographic sex is not made acceptable simply by introducing a condom.
Another major group has publicly denounced the impact of pornography. The Knights of Columbus, whose 1.78 million members comprise a very large and influential segment of society, passed a resolution against porn last week. You can read the full statement here, but the resolutions are worth reprinting:
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Knights of Columbus calls upon law enforcement officials at all levels to vigorously investigate and prosecute criminal conduct in this area, especially child pornography; and
FURTHER RESOLVED, that we commend those in the entertainment industry who provide family-friendly programming and products, pledge, as consumers to support them, and call upon the industry in general to halt the steady erosion of public standards of decency and restraint; and
FURTHER RESOLVED, that we encourage all parents to foster a wholesome atmosphere and open communication on sexual matters within the family, and call upon all Knights to support groups that work to oppose pornography and promote family values and respect for human dignity in the media.
If these resolutions are followed by enough law enforcement officials, entertainment companies and individual parents, we will surely see a reversal of our sexual decline. Public actions like this encourage me and lead me to believe our nation hasn’t lost its soul just yet.
The Associated Press reports on an much-needed police sting in Florida. Police have charged three employees of the Orlando Weekly with aiding and abetting prostitution and profiting from it. Undercover officers say they sought to buy ad space claiming to sell sex, otherwise known as prostitution, also fairly well known to be illegal in the United States (outside of a few Nevada counties and anywhere indoors in Rhode Island).
Attorney Pat Trueman told Family News in Focus that many papers may be at risk for similar investigations. “There is no First Amendment protection to be involved in a crime. And, when a newspaper is taking advertisements for prostitution they are aiding and abetting that crime.”
Some things to note here:
1) Newspapers across the country routinely feature sexually explicit ads for massages and other creative euphemisms for prostitution. They also advertise sex chat lines, which are also prohibited by federal law.
2) Trueman says the paper could have been aiding and abetting a crime. That’s just an opinion until the defendants are found guilty, but the point is worth pondering.
How many other entities may be abetting criminal activity surrounding porn and prostitution? Some possibilities:
- Hotels that profit from the sale of obscene pornography via pay-per-view systems
- Cable and satellite providers that sell the same material
Then there are those TV shows, so-called news organizations, and teen idols whose actions make them little more than shills for the commercial sex industry. This, too, is aiding and abetting through deceitful marketing.
Let’s revisit points 8 and 10 of the Code of Conduct for Men in the 21st Century. Say it with me:
8. I WILL NOT BUY products that advertise by exploiting women’s bodies when it has nothing at all to do with the product.
10. I WILL NOT BUY newspapers and magazines that advertise sexual services.
Ever wondered what the laws are regarding pornography? We’ve just posted great article by Robert Peters that helps explain federal obscenity law and lists some great “take action” ideas to clean up your community. Bob is president of Morality in Media and does great work. You might also want to check out his site for great interviews, background information and research.
Last week I wrote about a letter asking Attorney General Eric Holder for more federal obscenity law enforcement. Friday, the Department of Justice announced an indictment against a New Jersey-based pornographer, Barry Goldman, for sending allegedly obscene DVDs through the mail. According to 18 U.S.C. § 1461 and § 1467, that’s a big no-no. This investigation has been in the works for several years, but it is still nice to see the current DOJ leadership has allowed it to continue. Big thanks to Brent Ward’s team on the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force which helped pull this off.
In case anyone is offended that Barry was singled out for justice, the indictment lists some of the films in question: “Torture of a Porn Store Girl” and “Defiant Crista Submits.” I haven’t seen the films in question, but given the DOJ’s policy of only targeting the worst of the worst, it is safe to assume these were violent and degrading videos.
In his brutally honest book Getting Off: The End of Masculinity, Robert Jensen asks some crucial questions society must begin to answer, particularly those who would defend pornography’s place in the public square. He writes:
“If pornography is increasingly cruel and degrading, why is it increasingly commonplace instead of more marginalized? In a society that purports to be civilized, wouldn’t we expect most people to reject sexual material that becomes ever more dismissive of the humanity of women? How do we explain the simultaneous appearance of more, and increasingly more intense, ways to humiliate women sexually and the rising popularity of the films that present those activities?”
I am one of those folks who believes that laws ought to be enforced. That’s why I was pleased to see a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder signed by more than 300 pro-family leaders and individuals. The letter congratulates AG Holder on his confirmation and urges him to begin prosecuting illegal pornography.
When Holder was Deputy Attorney General in 1998, he authored a memo to all United States Attorneys, urging them to fight the spread of obscene material.
“Thus, priority should be given to cases involving large-scale distributors who realize substantial income from multi-state operations and cases in which there is evidence of organized crime involvement. However, prosecution of cases involving relatively small distributors can have a deterrent effect and would dispel any notion that obscenity distributors are insulated from prosecution if their operations fail to exceed a predetermined size or if they fragment their business into small-scale operations. … Because of the nature of the Internet and the availability of agents trained in conducting criminal investigations in cyberspace, investigation and prosecution of Internet obscenity is particularly suitable for federal resources.”
It’s a very good memo and a very good strategy. We believe enforcing the law as outlined above would have significant impact on the amount and substance of the pornography made available to the public. People often wonder if anything can be done to stem the tide of pornography. Attorney General Holder spells out what can be done and now he is in a position to make it all happen.
The letter asks for a meeting with some of the key pro-family leaders to discuss a renewed enforcement effort. We hope the Attorney General will agree to the meeting and lay out a plan that restores some of the public trust in his office.
