Targeting porn on military bases
Posted April 25th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Share This | Spotlight | Permalink
Some very strange conservative activists, apparently with far too much time on their hands, launched an initiative last November to limit U.S. troops' access to adult materials. It never occurred to me that policy makers would take this seriously, but apparently, they are.
To quickly recap for those just joining us, Congress banned sales of sexually explicit materials on military bases 11 years ago, but the Pentagon continues to allow base stores to sell magazines such as Playboy and Penthouse, which officials don't consider explicit enough to prohibit.
The American Family Association and the Alliance Defense Fund, two religious right groups, demanded the Congress and Defense Secretary Robert Gates takes steps to scrutinize materials, including magazines and films, sold to the troops and their families.
Defense officials "don't want to take porn away from soldiers," ADF attorney Patrick Trueman said. "They say, 'well, 40% of this magazine is sexually explicit pictures, but 60% is writing or advertising, so the totality is not sexually explicit.' That's ridiculous."
Oddly enough, the activists actually found a far-right member of Congress to take their demands seriously.
U.S. Congressman Paul C. Broun, M.D. announced today the introduction of legislation designed to stem the sale of pornography on military installations. Broun's legislation, the "Military Honor and Decency Act," closes a loophole in current law that is allowing the sale of sexually explicit material on American military installations located both within the United States and around the world.
Upon unveiling his bill, Broun, a retired Marine, said, "Allowing the sale of pornography on military bases has harmed military men and women by: escalating the number of violent, sexual crimes; feeding a base addiction; eroding the family as the primary building block of society; and denigrating the moral standing of our troops both here and abroad."
The right is apparently lining up behind Broun's bill.
National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez took up the cause yesterday.
The last thing I'd ever want is a feminizing of our military. But military bases are family affairs and therefore this is worth a discussion.
I love men. I love men being men. I love military men. And I thank God they are military men. But I find it hard to believe that all military men are "drinking and whoring Saturday night," and if they are in any kind of majority, yeah, that bears scrutiny.
Like I said yesterday, I don't know that Broun's legislation is a good idea. But I know what he's thinking: Porn is bad. Why is the military peddling it? It's a good question. Not the biggest question of our day; it's not the hill to die on, as many readers have put it to me. But porn in our culture does need to be addressed and discussed. And if that indicates a feminization of anything, maybe that's what women are here for - to, every once in awhile, stand athwart history and yell, "Stop. What are we doing to our men?"
Let me get this straight. U.S. troops are fighting two wars, neither of which are going well, and Republicans believe we should spend time and energy considering what kind of magazines U.S. troops can purchase on base? Here's a radical idea: maybe those who wear the uniform and put their lives on the line for their country should be able to read whatever they want.
Yeah,
great idea. Remove one of the few remaining enjoyable things they still have. And they wonder why they have trouble getting people to enlist.
"You've all been selected for this mission because you each have a special skill. Professor Hawking, John Leslie, Phil Neville, the Wu-Tang Clan, Usher, the Sugar Puffs Monster and Daniel Day-Lewis! Welcome to Operation MindFuck!"
