How can anybody who supports the First Amendment even think about supporting Romney?

As the song in ‘Avenue Q’ says The internet is for porn, the internet is for porn, Thats why the internet was born. Porn porn porn’ (or something to that effect, I was laughing too hard to remember the exact words.

While I personally do not support Romney and find the positions described in the OP to be absurd, I imagine that people who support both Romney and the First Amendment would say that (a) they are not single-issue voters and (b) filters do not stop competent adults from obtaining pornography. The Religious Right is also not quite as enamored with a broad interpretation of the First Amendment as other conservatives might be, so they might very well be fine with what they perceive as the immorality of pornography outweighing the putative value of allowing it under free speech laws.

Indeed, some members of the Religious Right just straightforwardly disagree that pornography counts as art or speech and therefore falls into a protected class. Thus they could argue that there is no conflict between wanting to both uphold the First Amendment and prohibit pornography. I would disagree with them, but that’s at least one line of argument they could pursue.

@majorrich Great show! The whole song can be heard here if you’d like to refresh your memory.

Ehh, as much as I am not a fan of Romney, the quote that I found seemed to indicate to me that he thinks that computers should come pre-loaded with a filter that will allow parents to choose to utilize it to prevent their kids from viewing porn on the internet. If that’s the case, I have no problem with it.

He’s not O’Bummer. Hurr hurr.

^^^^ What?

Romney may not have the greatest understanding of all aspects of the US constitution.

But when we consider the alternative it gets easier to decide where to direct ones support.

During his first campaign Obama promised to bring wholesale change to America. I read this as meaning, should he be able to do so that America as we know it would be significantly altered.

An Individual like me, that is generally pleased with the United States and doesn’t take it for granted is naturally going to be concerned when a person promises to, once the power is theirs, turn the country (partially, at least) into something else.

The likelihood of my being as pleased with it as I was logically must decrease.

@syz If just for that instance regarding the PCs, I would agree. However, coupled with other things he has said, I feel that either the filter would be mandatory and always on even for adults or Romney has softened his stance.

If elected Romney will be unable to pass such a stupid piece of legislation. It just won’t happen.

I wonder how many in the anti- porno set that use the internet realize that pornography is the backbone of the Net and the money from it’s sites is the single biggest factor in the internet’s growth to its becoming what we have at our disposal.

Can anybody who supports the Tenth Ammendment support any contemporary candidate. Give me a break.

Personally, I am not in favor of Porn being so readily available, but I do not support Romney’s stance. I don’t support Romney in any way, his election would be a disaster. Obama is far from perfect, but of the two candidates, Romney’s willingness to keep the military budget maxed-out & to gut the social services that help the needy among us, make the election of Obama a better choice. As for the Porn industry, it is a multi-million dollar industry, & I am sure that they have enough Lobby money to spread around Congress to keep a filter from happening.

@josie I think it safe to say that the Tenth Amendment proves that the United States is not a nation; rather, it’s an alliance of fifty different countries. And given what has happened in Texas, the South, and parts of the Midwest, I think we need to beefing up security at the state borders and taking other measures to keep other “nations” from imposing their will on my homeland (WA), but that is another discussion for another time.

Do you have any citings for these positions of Romney’s?

@Aethelflaed Let’s start here

That is far from the only such citing I’ve seen making that claim or similar though.

All browsers and most PC already have a porn/parental control filter.
Tell me something new.
The other comment is not much different than some of the idiotic things many people come out with.
Yawn.

I will never support any politician who claims to favor small, unobtrusive government when I find out that by small, this clown means little enough to be embedded in all my loving spaces, the dashboard of my car and all my bodily cavities so big brother can watch me 24/7.

@blueiiznh That is what I thought; there is no need for installing a mandatory filter unless you wanted to make the filter more restrictive, possibly by making it so that it cannot be disabled. If a parent wants to stop their child from surfing porn (not that filters do a good job of stopping them anyways) then they already have access to the means to do so. If they do not do so then either they do not want to, or they are too computer-illiterate to configure a filter that comes pre-installed from the factory.
Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that the filter Romney proposes is not meant to be controlled by the user, but rather, by the government

The same way they can vote for any Republican candidate who on the average doesn’t follow any particular religion but preaches as if they do in order to get the vote of those who claim to do so. Those same people who have voted for any other Republican over the last 50+ years will easily enough vote for yet another one. Why not? Their entire platform of issues orbits around the removal of rights from anyone who isn’t within a certain class, race or religion for the most part and all of it under the guise that they or their maker knows what is best for everyone to the point where it justifies them in restricting others from their freedoms for their own good/safety.

@Jenniehowell The Religious Right is ruining conservative politics.

@Crashsequence2012 I agree – I think if the population were tested without the use of party affiliated key words or terms etc the majority of Americans would actually fall more in the conservative side – especially those of color actually & yet thanks to the religious right & their nearly constant ignorant statements & views many who would be conservative on perhaps a fiscal level are choosing to affiliate themselves more as liberals or libertarians.

Were it not for the religious right the conservative side of things would have an immensely easier time of getting things done their way.

Once upon a time I would have identified more closely with the conservatives (Republicans) rather than with the “liberals” (“Democrats”) but….the outrageously extreme reaction of the Republicans after Obama’s election left me with a gross taste in my mouth. I want to disassociate myself from “them” as far as possible.