In the hope of solidifying his socially conservative base through his continued efforts to morally regulate the lives of Americans, Rick Santorum has added pornography to the list of industries he would like to shut down.
“A wealth of research is now available demonstrating that pornography causes profound brain changes in both children and adults, resulting in widespread negative consequences…pornography is toxic to marriages and relationships. It contributes to misogyny and violence against women,” said Santorum in a press release.
While it is exciting to see Santorum referencing scientific research to support his moral pandering, there are some holes in his argument.
According to a 2006 study by Clemson University economist Todd Kendall, “the arrival of the Internet was associated with a reduction in rape incidence. However, growth in internet usage had no apparent effect on other crimes.”
Even though this correlation exists, Santorum is still right about the effects pornography can have on marriages and relationships. However, so long as no one is harmed, it is not the job of the government to regulate what goes on behind closed doors.
Regardless of one’s views on pornography, as long as the pornographic images are of two consenting adults there is no reason for those images to not be made available to another consenting adult.
When you decrease the supply of a product, the demand for that product generally increases.
Stringently enforcing federal obscenity laws will simply shut down businesses that follow the law by not using actors who are underage. However, the smaller businesses that break the law anyway by displaying underage actors will continue to do so.
While many might find pornographic images offensive, those images are not thrown at people. Individuals must seek them out. It is not the role of the federal government to protect consenting adults from viewing those images. Legislating morality has never worked and it never will.
While I agree with the central thesis of this editorial, I do have one question. Under what economic theory does the following sentence hold true?
"When you decrease the supply of a product, the demand for that product generally increases."
Typically, when you outlaw a product, the price of that product increases as suppliers will demand extra compensation in exchange for assuming the legal risks. This typically lowers the quantity of product that is demanded/consumed.
It looks like Santorum is definitely not winning the nomination now… You can take our jobs, you can take our homes, but you'll never take OUR PORNO!!!