Bill to ban porn is moral pandering that swipes at bros who went right
Are you worried about paying your bills? Affording health care? Or watching democracy crumble like a Nature Valley granola bar?
Well, never fear, Utah Senator Mike Lee is here to protect you from the real threat: your incognito tab.
Yes, Lee and fellow Republican Rep. Mary Miller's Interstate Obscenity Definition Act would criminalize all pornography.
The bill would create a national definition of obscenity under the Communications Act of 1934 and amend the Supreme Court's 1973 'Miller Test' for determining what qualifies as obscene. Content could be deemed obscene if it depicts or describes 'actual or simulated sexual acts with the objective intent to arouse, titillate or gratify the sexual desires of a person.'
That's a definition so wide it could sweep up a whole lot of HBO shows with it.
Beyond that glaringly wide net of a definition, this seems like just another virtue signaling culture war proposal that will never actually make it to President Trump's desk. But, then again, who knows. One of Project 2025's many goals was to permanently criminalize all pornography.
So if this legislation were to actually gain momentum, we could witness the GOP alienate one of its newly secured voting blocs: chronically online young men.
Since the November 2024 election, the conversation about young men's shift to the right has been written about ad nauseum. So much so, 'manosphere' is likely in the running for Webster's 2025 Word of the Year.
We know that young men helped elect Trump. They're enmeshed in online political discourse. And yes — many of them are consumers of exactly the content this bill targets.
The modern right wing movement has spent years cultivating this audience: through podcasts, YouTube influencers, 'anti-woke' crusades and appeals to grievance politics. These young men have been told, repeatedly, that their frustrations with feminism, social progress and a rapidly changing culture are valid — and that the right will fight for them. But this bill does the opposite.
It tells them: You, too, are the problem.
It's hard to overstate how deeply ingrained online adult content is in the digital ecosystem these voters inhabit. Platforms like OnlyFans, PornHub and other streaming sites have become — whether we like it or not — a major outlet for young men who feel disconnected from traditional relationships and left behind economically. Taking that away, without offering anything in its place, is a recipe for alienation and backlash.
And it's not just about habits or personal freedom. This is a policy so extreme that it risks turning a culture war into a self-inflicted political wound. Banning all porn doesn't just raise enormous First Amendment concerns — it invites backlash from libertarians, moderates, and yes, the online foot soldiers of the 'anti-woke' movement.
Instead of focusing on real issues — economic insecurity, mental health, loneliness, sex education — this proposal feels like a distraction. A symbolic gesture that ignores root causes in favor of moral posturing.
There are serious debates to be had about online content, consent, exploitation and mental health. But making millions of Americans potential criminals for what they watch in the privacy of their homes isn't policy. It's performative politics.
Opinion: We asked readers about arrest of Milwaukee Judge Dugan. Here's what you said.
And for a party that, until recently, struggled to connect with younger voters, it's a risky move to send the message: 'We trust you with guns— but not with Google.'
The question isn't whether porn is good or bad. The question is whether the government should be the arbiter of morality and obscenity in the digital age.
And if the GOP insists on fighting that battle, they may find their greatest casualty isn't just the adult entertainment industry — it's part of their own voter base.
Kristin Brey is the "My Take" columnist for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: GOP porn bill says we trust you with guns but not Google | Opinion
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
SMU researcher says proposed Tarrant County redistricting 'diminishes' voting power
The Brief Tarrant County commissioners are set to vote on new district maps within days, a process led by Republican County Judge Tim O'Hare. Critics say the proposed maps violate racial protections in the Voting Rights Act by concentrating non-White voters into one district, diluting their voting power. An SMU researcher's analysis appears to suggest the new maps may be biased against non-White voters. TARRANT COUNTY, Texas - The Republican-led Tarrant County Commissioners Court is days away from voting to redraw district lines. Critics say the proposed maps violate racial protections in the Voting Rights Act. Now, an SMU researcher is applying her own mathematical review to the maps. The Latest SMU mathematics professor and researcher Dr. Andrea Barreiro has dissected and analyzed the newly proposed maps for Tarrant County districts, the work of a county-hired consulting firm and the public legal interest foundation. The researcher uses mathematics and technology to analyze the redistricting models. She says she was drawn to Tarrant County's current process as attention surrounding the topic began to grow. Barreiro looks for signatures of partisan and racial gerrymandering, she says. The current process to redraw the county's lines is led by Republican County Judge Tim O'Hare. At the center of the controversy are District 1, held by Commissioner Roderick Miles, and District 2, a seat now held by Commissioner Alisa Simmons, both Democrats. What they're saying "It looks like they made small modifications on this basic template where they swap the purple and the blue to get their desired outcome," Barreiro said. Barreiro says a randomly unbiased generated map based on the latest census data would have 60 to 65 percent non-White voters in each of those districts. "The proposed maps do something very different," Barreiro said. "They take a lot of those non-White voters in District 2, and they pack them into District 1, leaving District 2 to be majority White." Barreiro uses advanced software, applying a method known as Markov Chain Analysis. Her experience using the same technology includes similar analysis her team prepared during the state legislative redistricting cycle. "We have continued to reach out to Judge O'Hare for his response to allegations of racial gerrymandering by Simmons, Miles, as well as U.S. Congressman Marc Veasey and ten Tarrant County mayors," Barreiro said. Barreiro stops short of making a legal opinion on whether the proposed maps violate state and federal law. She does say it is clear what the consultant map-maker's mission is. "If black voters could be a large presence in two districts, but instead you pack all those people by picking your map cleverly, you get all those people into one district, then you diminish the voting power of that population," Barreiro said. "There are interesting methodological and mathematical questions about this whole process that I'm eager to explore, and I'm also just interested in basic fairness." What's next Late Thursday afternoon, O'Hare agreed to an interview with FOX 4. The meeting is set for Friday morning. A vote on Tarrant County's redistricting process is set for Tuesday. The backstory The mayors of 10 Tarrant County cities, including Fort Worth, Arlington, Mansfield, and Grand Prairie, have signed a letter expressing their opposition to the proposed map. The group called the effort ill-timed because it's the middle of the decade and, in their opinion, the census data from 2020 is outdated. In early April, the commission voted three to two, with commissioners Alisa Simmons and Roderick Miles opposing, to approve a contract with the Public Interest Legal Foundation to provide consultation with re-drawing district lines. The Source Information in this article came from SMU researcher Dr. Andrea Barreiro and previous FOX 4 reporting.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Lawyers Claim Kamala Harris' '60 Minutes' Interview Caused Him 'Mental Anguish'
President Donald Trump has apparently suffered from 'mental anguish' as a result of a CBS News '60 Minutes' interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris last year, his lawyers alleged in court documents. Trump's attorneys made the claim Wednesday in a motion to deny Paramount Global's request to dismiss Trump's lawsuit, which First Amendment experts have called 'frivolous and dangerous,' against CBS over the editing of the interview. (Paramount Global is the parent company of CBS.) In the October-filed lawsuit obtained by HuffPost, Trump accuses the network of 'partisan and unlawful acts of election and voter interference through malicious, deceptive, and substantial news distortion.' This, according to the suit, was exhibited through two slightly differing clips of Harris discussing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with journalist Bill Whitaker. According to court documents filed Wednesday, Trump's attorneys claim 'this led to widespread confusion and mental anguish of consumers, including plaintiffs, regarding a household name of the legacy media apparently deceptively distorting its broadcasts, and then resisting attempts to clear the public record.' The interview 'forced' Trump to 'redirect significant time, money and effort to correcting the public record,' the document said. The motion also called the president a 'content creator,' whose content creation 'was damaged by the attention diverted to Defendants' distorted programming.' The network maintains that the interview was 'not doctored or deceitful.' 'In reporting the news, journalists regularly edit interviews – for time, space or clarity. In making these edits, 60 Minutes is always guided by the truth and what we believe will be most informative to the viewing public – all while working within the constraints of broadcast television,' CBS said in a February statement. The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday that the president turned down a $15 million settlement offer, which falls short of his desired compensation: more than $25 million and a CBS News apology. The president has also threatened to file another lawsuit against the company over what he claims is biased reporting, according to the WSJ. Trump has repeatedly gone after '60 Minutes' and has so far unsuccessfully called on CBS to lose its broadcast license on multiple occasions. In one of his countless social media rants in April, he slammed the show after choosing to hate-watch it. 'They are not a 'News Show,' but a dishonest Political Operative simply disguised as 'News,' and must be responsible for what they have done, and are doing,' the president wrote at the time. 'They should lose their license!' At least two top executives, including CBS News CEO Wendy McMahon and '60 Minutes' executive producer Bill Owens, have stepped down as the network seeks to make a deal with Trump. SEC Dismisses Lawsuit Against Binance As Trump Continues To Cozy Up To Crypto Trump Turns Down $15 Million Offer To Settle '60 Minutes' Lawsuit: Report The Extremely Dumb Excuse That Republicans Are Using To Justify Trump's Corruption The Trump Administration Is Trapping Migrant Kids In Shelters
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Exclusive-Trump aims to exceed first term's weapons sales to Taiwan, officials say
By Michael Martina, Yimou Lee and Ben Blanchard WASHINGTON/TAIPEI (Reuters) -The United States plans to ramp up weapons sales to Taipei to a level exceeding President Donald Trump's first term as part of an effort to deter China as it intensifies military pressure on the democratic island, according to two U.S. officials. If U.S. arms sales to Taiwan do accelerate, it could ease worries about the extent of Trump's commitment to the island. It would also add new friction to the tense U.S.-China relationship. The U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said they expect U.S. approvals for weapons sales to Taipei over the next four years to surpass those in Trump's first term, with one of the officials saying arms sales notifications to Taiwan could "easily exceed" that earlier period. They also said the United States is pressing members of Taiwan's opposition parties not to oppose the government's efforts to increase defense spending to 3% of the island's budget. The first Trump administration approved sales of approximately $18.3 billion worth of weapons to Taiwan, compared with around $8.4 billion during Joe Biden's term, according to Reuters calculations. The United States is Taiwan's most important international backer and arms supplier despite the lack of formal diplomatic ties between Washington and Taipei. Even so, many in Taiwan, which China claims as its own, worry that Trump may not be as committed to the island as past U.S. presidents. On the election campaign trail, Trump suggested Taiwan should pay to be protected and also accused the island of stealing American semiconductor business, causing alarm in Taipei. China has vowed to "reunify" with the separately governed island, by force if necessary. Taiwan's government rejects Beijing's sovereignty claims, saying only the island's people can decide their future. The U.S. officials said administration officials and Trump himself were committed to "enhancing hard deterrence" for Taiwan. "That's where the president is. That's where all of us are," one U.S. official said, adding that they were working closely with Taiwan on an arms procurement package to be rolled out when Taiwan secured domestic funding. Taiwan's Presidential Office told Reuters the government is determined to strengthen its self-defense capabilities and pointed to its proposals to increase defense spending. "Taiwan aims to enhance military deterrence while continuing to deepen its security cooperation with the United States," Presidential Office spokesperson Wen Lii said. Taiwan's defense ministry declined to comment on any new arms sales, but reiterated previous remarks by the island's defense minister, Wellington Koo, about the importance of "solidarity and cooperation of democratic allies." 'DON'T GET IN THE WAY' Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te and his Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) aim to increase defense spending to 3% of GDP this year through a special defense budget. But the island's parliament, controlled by opposition parties the Kuomintang (KMT) and the Taiwan People's Party (TPP), passed budget cuts earlier this year that threatened to hit defense spending. That triggered concerns in Washington, where officials and lawmakers have regularly said the U.S. cannot show more urgency over Taiwan's defense than the island itself. "We're messaging pretty hard (in Taipei) to the opposition. Don't get in the way of this. This isn't a Taiwanese partisan question. This is a Taiwanese survival question," one of the U.S. officials told Reuters. Three people in Taiwan with direct knowledge of the situation confirmed that the U.S. government and U.S. congressional visitors have been pressing the opposition parties in Taiwan not to block defense spending, especially the coming special defense budget, which is expected to be proposed to parliament later this year. "As long as they knew there were people from the opposition in the room, they directly asked them not to cut the defense budget," one of the people said. Alexander Huang, director of the KMT's international department, told Reuters it was "beyond question" that the party firmly supports increasing the defense budget and its "doors are open" to the U.S. government and the ruling DPP for consultations. "Supporting an increased budget does not mean serving as a rubber stamp, nor does it preclude making adjustments or engaging in negotiations regarding the special budget proposals put forth by the DPP administration," he added. The much smaller TPP said it has "always had smooth communication with the U.S. side and has continued to engage in in-depth dialogue on issues such as national defense and regional security." Reuters reported in February that Taiwan was exploring a multi-billion dollar arms purchase from the U.S., hoping to win support from the new Trump administration. New weapons packages are expected to focus on missiles, munitions and drones, cost-effective means to help improve Taiwan's chances of rebuffing any military action by China's much larger forces. For years, China has been steadily ramping up its military pressure to assert its sovereignty claims over the island that is home to critical chip manufacturing vital to the global economy. Separately, one of the U.S. officials said the Trump administration would not object to a transit this year through U.S. territory by Lai, whom Beijing labels a "separatist." Past visits to the United States by Taiwanese officials have triggered angry objections by China, which sees such trips as inappropriate given that the United States has diplomatic relations with Beijing, not Taipei. Taiwan's presidential office spokesperson Lii said there are currently "no plans for a presidential transit through the United States at the moment."
