Nose-picking and porn are equivalent? That explains the mulit-billion dollar industry built up around nose-picking.

And I must have clicked the wrong reply button, but this question was intended for you:

Do you have kids?

Without comment about the moral arguments for or against porn, the idea that it's just pictures is tough to justify. Porn is designed to produce a very specific neurochemical response in people, a response powerful enough to lead to irrational decision-making (See Airley's book, Predictably Irrational).

The fact that people can (not necessarily will) get addicted to this neurochemical response is not only unsurprising, but well documented.

I also suggest you read what you wrote again. Sacrificing valuable personal relationships for something of lesser value is a textbook element of addiction, established by people who study addiction for their careers. But you say that letting your marriage fall apart over porn, which happens to people who are addicted to it, is just a matter of priorities? Can we say the same thing then about the meth head or the alcoholic? If not, what makes porn different? (And again you'll have a hard time with the porn is just pictures argument.)

Your assumption that I am "controlling" my kids to the point that they can't learn self-control is also pretty speculative. Can you point to the specific things I'm doing? Do you even know who my kids are and how I am raising them? The only thing you know right now is that I think filtering porn from their web browsing experience is good parenting. (For the record, my kids are 7, 5, and 2.)

Finally, I'll just ask the question directly. Do you have kids?

Do you have kids?

First, the parent post implied that bad things happen in the world so you might as well let them happen in your house. He started off implying pornography was bad.

Second, pornography has the same to do with addiction that alcohol does. Many people don't get addicted while many people do. Marriages get wrecked because a husband loses interest in his wife since she doesn't look like a porn star. That's not just about "pictures of boobies."

If you were married (and you may be) and your wife asked you to stop looking at porn, would you do it even if you thought her request was unreasonable? There are a lot of men out there who would keep looking at porn at the cost of their marriage. That's a textbook example of addiction.

This all relates to kids because many such addictions are developed during teenage years when kids are still learning self-control skills. Is it really unreasonable of me to try and help my kids develop these skills before they get exposed to this stuff?

Do you have kids? If not, then you ought to shut up before you make yourself look even more stupid.

Just because bad stuff exists in the world doesn't mean I have to let it into my house. Should I invite crack whores and rapists over to hang out with my kids just because they exist? The nature of addiction, with pornography or whatever, pretty much puts the burden on me to teach and protect my kids while they are still learning basic skills like self-control.

And some parents may "kick them out" (their kids) at age 18, but most hard-working, caring parents plan on being there as a resource to their kids for the rest of their lives, not just until they become legal adults.

Utah is one of the best run states in the country, from an egovernment and general management perspective.

At least, that's according to the Pew Center on the States. Compare states' report cards with that linked page.

But yeah, the keyword legislation is stupid.

Hehe. This is a great story, especially the bit about the iced tea. I am sure the Mormons in your group appreciated the sentiment, but the vast majority of Mormons wouldn't have held it against you.

What people don't get is that within Mormonism there are mostly mainstream Mormons and then a handful of dogmatic Mormons. Just like in the Catholic church, in Judaism, in Islam, etc. Utah's legislature gets populated with these kinds of people for the same reason Congress does.

Techincally, a "tax expenditure" is when the government forgoes revenue on something in order to protect or promote it (ex. the 501(c)(3) tax exemption is a tax expenditure on charitable activities). See this definition: Tax Expenditure

The federal government "spends" vast amounts of money by specially exempting certain things from taxation. (This is not to be confused with the stuff government doesn't have a right to tax to begin with.)