Skip to main content

Todd Weiler's bass ackwards view on free speech

Republican Utah Governor Gary Herbert recently signed a bill declaring that pornography is creating a public health crisis. Republican State Senator Todd Weiler, the sponsor of the measure, then appeared on the conservative Family Research Council's program, Washington Watch, when he said this:

"I said to McDonald's, 'You're a family restaurant and you market to children, why would you want to be a purveyor of pornography?' You know, the librarians will put their hands over their hearts and talk about the First Amendment and yet if these libraries and these McDonald's were giving cigarettes to our children, we'd all be up in arms, we'd be picketing them. But somehow it's okay if they deliver pornography to them. That's what I think is often lost in the First Amendment discussion, because someone may have the First Amendment right, according to the U.S. Supreme Court, to view pornography, but what about my First Amendment right to not view it?"

Eh, what? Now I for one don't watch pornography, but still think Senator Weiler has a pretty bass ackwards view regarding the matter.

Let's take another look at the final sentence of Weiler's quote:

"That's what I think is often lost in the First Amendment discussion, because someone may have the First Amendment right, according to the U.S. Supreme Court, to view pornography, but what about my First Amendment right to not view it?"

 I may not watch pornography, but I also don't think it should be made illegal, and know that while I have the freedom to watch it if I so choose, I also have the freedom of not watching it. Senator Weiler doesn't seem to realize this, and I'm seriously wondering if he's hooked on porn, to the point where he wants it to be made illegal so he can't watch it. Why else would he say what he did?

"Sure, the Supreme Court made it legal to watch porn, but what if I don't want to watch it? I mean, no matter what I do, it's on. When I wake up in the morning, when I go to bed at night, when I'm in the shower, when I'm driving to work, when I'm at a bar, when I'm at church, it's always on my phone, and I can't stop it!"

Senator Weiler, you have a First Amendment right to not view pornography, so stop watching it! I mean, don't even start... Well, I must be going now. A friend of mine seems to be of the same mindset as Mr. Weiler, is constantly smoking cigarettes, while declaring, "I should have a right to not smoke it!" So yeah, I'll need to have a similar discussion with her. Wish me luck...

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/utah-goper-says-access-pornography-violates-his-right-not-view-it
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more