Taking a strong stand on pornography

The dangers of pornography---online and in printed form---for children (and adults, for that matter) have been increasingly well-documented in recent years, thanks largely to the work of Dr. Judith Reisman. Organizations like Enough Is Enough here in the United States have been working hard to spread the word to parents. Warren Cole Smith wrote last month for this website about a new report called "The Social Costs of Pornography."

Australians seem to be taking it very seriously. Over 30 of that country's leading child experts have signed a letter to the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General/Censorship Ministers calling for a ban on the sale of magazines like Playboy and Penthouse, generally considered "soft porn," from newsstands, convenience stores, and gas stations, where young people have easy access to them. The materials would be restricted to adults-only premises.

Having just seen the latest Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition on display at my local drugstore chain, I can relate. What message does it send young girls and boys to see highly sexual images displayed next to their favorite candy bars?

As for internet porn, Australia is considering forcing internet service providers to block a variety of material, including certain types of pornography. The Obama administration disapproves of the plan. Michael Tran, a U.S. State Department spokesman explained why: "Our main message, of course, is that we remain committed to advancing the free flow of information, which we view as vital to economic prosperity and preserving open societies globally."

Other critics have said the proposed filter would put Australia in the same league as China when it comes to blocking material on the internet.

For conservatives like myself who believe in limited government, it may seem to be a slippery slope. Personally, I think the risks of children being exposed to pornography outweigh the risks of excessive government intervention in both of these cases.