I'm sure Utah Governor Gary Herbert is going to find what he's seeking in the studies he's using taxpayer money to fund: studies to prove that pornography is a public health hazard which creates a "toxic environment." Of course it's all an attempt to preach religion from the Governor's office and nothing more. But it's good to know that there is, at last, some notice of toxic environments in Utah, even if he's not actually talking about the environment we call air or water or land or even a toxin that actually poisons anything or any one. No, those nebulous but harmful effects need to be created, hence the study. We need to start studying pornography keeping in mind that it's bad, very bad: it's
"a public health hazard leading to a broad spectrum of individual and public health impacts and societal harms."It reminds me of Richard Nixon's studies of Marijuana intended to back up the bogus claims used to criminalize it. When the studies showed no harm to the stuff, he fired the researchers. But this isn't a medical or scientific study and it assumes the conclusion that grows out of the toxic environment we call religion. Truth by assertion is unassailable. Support by evidence produced by fake studies is simply window dressing. When it comes to research; those "studies" we always hear about find only what he who pays for them is seeking. These studies tend to be the building blocks of marketing if not also the bricks paving the road to hell. You pays yer money and you gets your study, complete with an actor in a lab coat and a clipboard. If it's freedom you're seeking, your not going to find it if the Gospel Growlers can help it.
I have to wonder if the public health "impacts" they most assuredly will find will be restricted to Utah, since they don't seem to appear in places where pornography is everywhere and I wonder if the "impact" of rampant abuse of women and young girls that is ignored or tolerated or swept under the rug in Utah will come under review here. I suppose it won't yet we can be sure there will be "links" to all sorts of health risks even if we have to invent consequences to be linked to. Something will be needed if the study bothers to examine countries whe
After all we can start with the premise that "pornography is rape" thanks to extremists of another stripe and after that the only hard part is not to talk about old Mormon men with harems of little girls and other forms of Latter Day female slavery in Utah and elsewhere.
But I don't want to blame it all on Mormons. The GOP has been straightjacket-worthy for decades, ignoring the real problems threatening our health and well-being, our freedom and survival, in favor of ranting about dirty pictures. The Tampa GOP convention in 2012 was quite obsessive on getting "tough" about pornography and I'm sure we can remember Ken Starr from previous campaigns attempting to criminalize even medical terminology concerned with sex on the internet. It's the Republican disease as much as a Christian disease but of course today there isn't enough difference to make it seem constitutional.
I might suggest that Evangelicals, religious fanatics of all sorts and the Republican Party are the real public health hazards: obfuscating public health programs, opposing individual liberty, thwarting science and supporting the oppression of "gentiles."
Isn't it funny - and by funny I mean tragic - that as a free country we encourage things that have no place in a free country?