Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

September 21, 2009

THEY STILL HATE PORN, TOO.... Over the years, the priorities of the religious right have shifted, which makes sense. The culture and political landscape have changed considerably since the Moral Majority first started influencing politics, so it stands to reason the movement's wish-list would adapt to evolving circumstances.

But some of the golden oldies still matter to this crowd. Michael Schwartz, a long-time right-wing activist who's served as Sen. Tom Coburn's (R-Okla.) chief of staff since 2005, spoke at a breakout session at the Values Voter Summit on Saturday, and attacked pornography.

"Pornography is a blight," Schwartz told an audience in a crowded room of the Omni Shoreham hotel. "It is a disaster. It is one of those silent diseases in our society that we haven't been able to overcome very well. Now, I may be getting politically incorrect here. And it's been a few years, but not that many, since I was closely associated with pre-adolescent boys, boys around 10 years of age. But it is my observation that boys of that age have less tolerance for homosexuality than just about any other class of people. They speak badly about homosexuality. And that's because they don't want to be that way. They don't want to fall into it."

Schwartz told the crowd about Jim Johnson, a friend of his who turned an old hotel into a hospice for gay men dying of AIDS. "One of the things he said to me," said Schwartz, "that I think is an astonishingly insightful remark… he said 'All pornography is homosexual pornography, because all pornography turns your sexual drive inwards."

There were murmurs and gasps from the crowd. "Now, think about that," said Schwartz. "And if you tell an 11-year-old boy about that, do you think he's going to want to get a copy of Playboy? I'm pretty sure he'll lose interest. That's the last thing he wants! You know, that's a good comment, it's a good point, and it's a good thing to teach young people."

Um, yeah. Tell young boys that looking at pictures of naked women might make them gay. That's a great strategy.

If you're not familiar with Michael Schwartz's work, he's quite a character. In 2005, he spoke at a right-wing theocratic conference and rejected the idea that the Supreme Court can deem unconstitutional laws passed by Congress. In other words, he's against judicial review -- a concept decided over two centuries ago in Marbury v. Madison.

Steve Benen 9:20 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (65)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Why was he "closely associating" himself with pre-adolescent boys at anytime?

Posted by: Little Miss Attila on September 21, 2009 at 9:30 AM | PERMALINK

Is looking at real naked women as effective or must it be pictures? And will this effect old men as well as young boys? And just in case, is there any known antidote? I need to know asap.

Posted by: Chopin on September 21, 2009 at 9:32 AM | PERMALINK

Well to be fair that is one of the interesting parts of the system, the Constitution doesn't give them that explicit power (except in the circumstances they spell out), they just took it for themselves and everyone agreed it was a good idea and that's how we've understood the constitution ever since.

Judicial Review created the power of Judicial Review!

Posted by: MNPundit on September 21, 2009 at 9:35 AM | PERMALINK

Given this fact, I wonder why the "Libertarian" wing of the Republican party stays there. Government intrusion into people's private lives should be anathema to them, right?

That was just a test, sorry. Obviously these so-called Libertarians are just too stupid (including the Ron Paul morons) to actually link the actions of their party to an intellectually honest ideal.

Oh, and let's not forget that an awful lot of these Fundamentalist Republicans also hate any type of birth control, too.

Posted by: BuzzMon on September 21, 2009 at 9:36 AM | PERMALINK

It is difficult to believe anybody actually said these things. Surely you are just joking, Mr. Benen? Right? Please, tell me its just a joke.

I tried to comment further but I feel stupid taking theses remarks seriously enough to do so.

I hope that people in the audience had a similar reaction.

Posted by: Jason on September 21, 2009 at 9:44 AM | PERMALINK

So all these Republicans having affairs are really just trying to avoid their homosexual tendencies?

Posted by: ComradeAnon on September 21, 2009 at 9:45 AM | PERMALINK

So, if looking at pictures of naked women can make you gay, I guess looking at actual naked women has an even greater probability of making you gay. And if that's the case, by logical extension we can conclude that having sex with a woman absolutely guarantees you're gay.

Wow. I've been married to the same woman for 21 years, and had lots of girlfriends before I got married. I never would have guessed that I'm actually gay. Thank goodness a christian Republican has finally come along to show me the error of my ways! Based on his reasoning, the only way to avoid becoming gay is to have sex with men. Problem solved!

Posted by: Domage on September 21, 2009 at 9:46 AM | PERMALINK

And this places Value Voters and Nude Model Carrie Prejean exactly where?

Posted by: John R on September 21, 2009 at 9:48 AM | PERMALINK

It has struck me that people who aren't getting
enough sex are always very fascinated by it, even
if the fascination takes the form of them being very
very cross that other people are getting some.

-- John Cleese

Posted by: Python (Monty) on September 21, 2009 at 9:48 AM | PERMALINK

And this places Value Voters and Nude Model Carrie Prejean exactly where?

Squarely in C Street, I imagine.

Posted by: TonyB on September 21, 2009 at 9:49 AM | PERMALINK

"There were murmurs and gasps from the crowd."

The murmurs were all the porn-loving Christian men in the audience suddenly realizing, "I must be a lesbian!"

"All pornography is homosexual pornography, because all pornography turns your sexual drive inwards."

That must explain why homosexuals only have sex with... themselves? Huh?

Posted by: Grumpy on September 21, 2009 at 9:49 AM | PERMALINK

Wow, and all those years as a kid when I looked at straight porn trying desperately to make myself straight... all the while I was just sealing my fate. Who knew?

Posted by: BigGayAl on September 21, 2009 at 9:50 AM | PERMALINK

if we all followed the wisdom of 10 year-old boys we'd all walk around hitting things (and people and animals) with sticks "just to see what happens."

come to think of it, 10 year-old boys make good republicans...

Posted by: neill on September 21, 2009 at 9:51 AM | PERMALINK

I was going to say the same thing as BigGayAl, but he beat me to it.

Posted by: fred on September 21, 2009 at 9:52 AM | PERMALINK

I lose interest in Playboy after awhile myself. That's when I reach for my DVD of Log Jam.

Posted by: Tony on September 21, 2009 at 9:52 AM | PERMALINK

Michael Schwartz . . . spoke at a right-wing theocratic conference and rejected the idea that the Supreme Court can deem unconstitutional laws passed by Congress.

What Schwartz would prefer is for the Constitution to be interpreted by a group of men with training in religion and morality -- a Council of Clerics, if you will.


Posted by: SteveT on September 21, 2009 at 9:53 AM | PERMALINK

I'm with Little Miss Attila. What does Schwartz mean by being 'closely associated with pre-adolescent boys'? Is he talking about his own kids? Did he have a job in which he dealt with pre-adolescent boys? If not, then this just sounds creepy and that fellow may have some issues beyond the usual Republican idiocy towards anything to do with sex.

Posted by: SRW1 on September 21, 2009 at 9:59 AM | PERMALINK

I was minding my own 'business' (er, actually playing with it) on a porn site, and when I clicked on a 'gay/underage/interracial DP'link, I got re-directed here.

So, my question is: Where are the pitchurs?

Posted by: DAY on September 21, 2009 at 10:03 AM | PERMALINK

Masturbation makes you blind and you can get VD from a toilet seat.

If I had known earlier, I'd not be a blind homosexual with a burning itch...

Posted by: Jeff In Ohio on September 21, 2009 at 10:11 AM | PERMALINK

I had a college housemate who claimed that exposure to Playboy during his formative years left him indifferent to any woman without a staple in her navel. This was many, many years before the modern vogue for piercing, so I'm hoping that some happy developments awaited him.

Posted by: Rand Careaga on September 21, 2009 at 10:12 AM | PERMALINK

Don't forget that according to Ann Coulter, all of Bill Clinton's sex with women just proves how gay he really is.

As for sex with women is concerned - if you enjoy it, then it's you who's enjoying it, so that means it's ultimately inwardly focused, and therefore, gay. Right?

Conservative reasoning about homosexuality is truly astonishing.

Posted by: DH Walker on September 21, 2009 at 10:16 AM | PERMALINK

Judicial review entitles five of nine men and women appointed for life to determine the main outlines of policy in whatever realm they choose to make their fiefdom--thus far, economic regulation (till 1937), gun control, abortion, campaign finance regulation, and desegregation measures and affirmative action. Dred Scott, Lochner, Heller, Buckley, Meredith--not a pretty picture. And all the more dubious for policy turning not on investigations into current conditions but into the minds of 18th century men.

This is not democracy at work.

Posted by: Solon on September 21, 2009 at 10:26 AM | PERMALINK

What a stupid way to attack the porn industy. Read Chris Hedges' "Empire of Illusion"; he has an eye-opening look at TODAY's porn industry (not the 70s or 80s industry) and how focused it is on violence and humiliation and degradation of women. And how this stuff has led directly to Abu Ghraib and torture porn, war porn, etc.

Posted by: Speed on September 21, 2009 at 10:29 AM | PERMALINK

Can anyone explain to me how sex became bad and guns became good? Really! I want to know.

Posted by: tinkeroom on September 21, 2009 at 10:30 AM | PERMALINK

So this guy is saying "Looking at Playboy makes you gay!"

/facepalm

Then I read the earlier paragraph, where the speaker is thinking out loud that 10-year-olds are overwhelming homophobic, and then I get it: he wants to use that homophobia to scare boys into not reading Playboys anymore.

It's scare tactics 101... again. And it's brain-dead scare tactics. How many 10-year-old boys are gonna think "hey, looking at naked women makes you gay?" Usually the fear is "ick, looking at naked guys makes you gay."

If the far right wants to keep kids from viewing porn, there's a far more logical way to dissuade them: remind the 10-year-olds that there is NO WAY on God's good earth that they will ever be lucky enough to ever meet the type of women who pose for Playboy. Point out that these women are rare beyond belief: how many women submit to pose for Playboy? Hundreds if not thousands, and only a handful get chosen. I'd point out to them that reading Playboy shouldn't make you horny: it should make you depressed, because eventually you'll figure out that you'll never see the likes of October 1988 in your life EVER. Um, not that I'm projecting or anything...

Posted by: PaulW on September 21, 2009 at 10:33 AM | PERMALINK

I love it - we should now (according to Mike Schwartz) be predicating our understanding of male sexuality on the behavior of 12, 13 & 14 year-old boys.
Sound like a recipe for success...?

Posted by: steveconga on September 21, 2009 at 10:40 AM | PERMALINK

I wonder what they think about Newt and his award to the Porn empire owner.

Posted by: mark on September 21, 2009 at 10:44 AM | PERMALINK

I wonder what they think about Newt and his award to the Porn empire owner.

See, that just shows you how evil and pernicious pornography is, that it can reach even our most stalwart defenders of righteousness and decency like Gingrich.

Concocting right-wing rationalizations for things is childs' play. It has to be - they do it all the time.

Posted by: DH Walker on September 21, 2009 at 10:49 AM | PERMALINK
"And if you tell an 11-year-old boy about that, do you think he's going to want to get a copy of Playboy? I'm pretty sure he'll lose interest in whatever you may have to say to him in the future, because you're clearly an idiot."

Fixed

Posted by: noncarborundum on September 21, 2009 at 10:54 AM | PERMALINK

You're not being fair to Mr. Schwartz. It's safe to assume that when an 11-year old boy looks at pictures of naked women, chances are he will soon feel a rather intense desire to stoke a dick. Granted, it's his own dick, but a dick nevertheless. And isn't the urge to stroke a dick one of the telltale warning signs of homosexuality, at least in the winger handbook on these things?

Posted by: R. Porrofatto on September 21, 2009 at 10:55 AM | PERMALINK

While it's usually visible in the way they behave, it's not very often you get one of these guys to actually admit that they chart their policy proposals based on the likes and dislikes of 10-year-old boys.

To a pre-adolescent boy, sex (in any form) is icky, and so are vegetables, homework, and being noticeably different from what is cool.

As I recall, 10-year-olds are also "speak badly about" being a "brainiac", a "retard", a "wuss", or a "spaz". (I was 10 a long time ago, so my terminology is dated, but I think the point stands.)

This is not the basis of sound public policy.

These people are just weird.

Posted by: biggerbox on September 21, 2009 at 11:08 AM | PERMALINK

the gasp was since the audience staying at the Omni was watching porn the night before in their rooms and now they all are going to watch same sex porn

Posted by: rajeev jain on September 21, 2009 at 11:13 AM | PERMALINK

I lose interest in Playboy after awhile myself. That's when I reach for my DVD of Log Jam. -- Tony

Or as SNL put it years ago:

"I found that interesting, very interesting, very *very* interesting . . . .

then suddenly I lost interest."

Posted by: Ian on September 21, 2009 at 11:16 AM | PERMALINK

Well, not that I'm giving him any credit, but there's a very narrow sense in which he's not wrong.

So-called "straight" pornography aimed at men these days focuses almost entirely on the penis and the ejaculation. (Well, actually, penises.) Often as not, they don't even bother to get breasts and vaginas in the shot, or in focus.

Of course, the subtext in all that is the degradation of women, not the promotion of male homosexuality. Pornographers wouldn't bother turning men gay even if they could; they just show what sells best. And apparently a very great many ostensibly heterosexual men have absolutely no problem enjoying pornography where the camera never leaves the penis. So much for that "innate revulsion."

Posted by: ML on September 21, 2009 at 11:31 AM | PERMALINK

"All pornography is homosexual pornography, because all pornography turns your sexual drive inwards."

I can buy that pornography might make one overly self-centered, but why would that have anything to do with increasing homosexual activity?

Unless of course those were the urges that you were fighting like crazy to suppress in yourself.

Posted by: N.Wells on September 21, 2009 at 11:38 AM | PERMALINK

Huh. So Sports Illustrated's swimsuit issue has been trying to make me gay for decades! And I just sat there, thinking that I was thinking about girls! I am so lucky to not be like totally flaming gay-homoseckshul right now.

Now it's mostly just evil internet porn that is trying to make me homosexual.

Yep, any day now I'll probably be an evil gay dude.

Posted by: KilgoreTrout XL on September 21, 2009 at 11:40 AM | PERMALINK

And if you tell an 11-year-old boy about that, do you think he's going to want to get a copy of Playboy? I'm pretty sure he'll lose interest.

I don't recall that ever happening and I'm pretty sure that I'm not gay. But, mostly I'm pretty sure this guy is talking out his ass.

Posted by: AK Liberal on September 21, 2009 at 11:47 AM | PERMALINK

Considering that the red states spend a lot more money on porn sites than the blue states, does this tell us anything about their sexual orientations? Is it that their absolute fury with anything remotely gay is just denial? I've often suspected that those most adamantly opposed to anything homosexual are those who most want to deny homosexual tendencies.

Posted by: Texas Aggie on September 21, 2009 at 11:56 AM | PERMALINK

Can anyone explain to me how sex became bad and guns became good? Really! I want to know.

Here's how.

Posted by: jonas on September 21, 2009 at 11:56 AM | PERMALINK

And it's been a few years, but not that many, since I was closely associated with pre-adolescent boys, boys around 10 years of age.

I wonder what the hell that means.

Posted by: kc on September 21, 2009 at 12:12 PM | PERMALINK

I wish these moronic religious nuts would stop caring about what other people were doing.

Posted by: okinkun on September 21, 2009 at 12:13 PM | PERMALINK

I thought gay marriage was what turned straight people gay.

Posted by: chrenson on September 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM | PERMALINK

Obviously pornography just isn't working for these people any more, doesn't have the zing it used to have. Why are they not getting laid no matter how much pornography they look at?

It must be the pornography's fault. That is the only explanation.

Posted by: cld on September 21, 2009 at 12:28 PM | PERMALINK

Being against the Supreme Court overruling laws from the Congress is not radical at all. It is the way things work in the United Kingdom. I suspect that a lot of countries don't give their supreme courts this authority. I even think I would be a good idea.

Posted by: Ed on September 21, 2009 at 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, all of us right wingers to to this guy whenever we need an opinion on something. And Van 'The Obscure' Jones, the "Green Jobs Commieczar", with delegated WH authority and budget is of no interest to anyone outside the fringe right, and his direct supervisor, I guess. Who is that anyway? Oh yeah, I seem to remember his name, can you guess it?

Posted by: tool on September 21, 2009 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINK

if "all pornography turns your sexual drive inwards," then ultimately, gay, doesn't it follow that all masturbation is gay? confused....

personally, i've looked at pictures of nekid women, looked at nekid women and have had sex with nekid woman and i'm still not gay....am i doing it wrong?

Posted by: dj spellchecka on September 21, 2009 at 3:53 PM | PERMALINK

That was one of the funniest things I've seen all day. If porn really made you gay the whole race would have long ago died out for lack of breeding couples.

On the other hand, I hear this tripe from my mother. Her and and her church feel that the worst afflicting this country is pornography coming out of Los Angeles. Enormous tax cuts for the rich, Wall St shenanigans, war crimes in Iraq, and such don't amount to a hill of beans by comparison.

Posted by: JohnK on September 21, 2009 at 10:58 PM | PERMALINK

I think, that american religious right is stark mad and insane. They are living in daydream, where nothing has to do with reality. As a finn I cant understand, how american people can stand these religious shitheads. If EVOLUTION in majority of american primary schools is dirty word, it is very evitable, that the religious right has too much power in USA.

Posted by: Jorma Saloniemi on September 22, 2009 at 3:55 AM | PERMALINK

I thought gay marriage was what turned straight people gay..

Posted by: Alex on September 22, 2009 at 8:00 AM | PERMALINK

If turning your sex drive inward is bad, then turning your sex drive outward is good? Just how do they do that, and where can you buy the videos? (grin)

Posted by: jimmy paravane on September 22, 2009 at 9:03 AM | PERMALINK

So... boys should be looking at pictures of naked men to make them heterosexual? Makes sense to me...

Posted by: David on September 22, 2009 at 11:22 AM | PERMALINK

Prob cause they are a bunch of closet cases!
e cigarette

Posted by: Jeff on September 22, 2009 at 11:23 AM | PERMALINK

FYI...Plaxico Burress Begins Prison Sentence Today!
Not that I have anything against the guy but finally these athletes might start to get it....You CAN'T just do anything you want an get away with it. If I get caught with a gun, I would have to do time too.

Just my 2 cents.....

Posted by: Bill Bartmann on September 22, 2009 at 1:26 PM | PERMALINK

Come on some Christians don't have sex because they enjoy it. They have it only to procreate and save the species.

And if it hadn't been for Barbi Benton in my younger years, who knows, maybe I would have turned gay!

Posted by: Ridge on September 22, 2009 at 3:53 PM | PERMALINK

Whats so wrong with gay people? Its ridiculous how gay people are looked down upon. Too bad the world can't accept their species huh? Because evidently humans are too damn selfish and cruel to have a mind capacity that can accept people for who they are.

Posted by: shelbz on September 23, 2009 at 1:18 AM | PERMALINK

@BuzzMon:

Libertarians ARE NOT Republicans. Show how much your Democrat warped mind knows of the affairs of political parties outside your own circle jerk.

Yes, I AM a LIBERTARIAN. The Ron Paul argument is weak - RP is a Libertarian, but he runs as a republican because most people don't vote outside of the two-party system (R vs. D)

Posted by: Crudo on September 23, 2009 at 3:57 AM | PERMALINK

has this retard even heard of the internet?

what fool buys porn nowadays?

there's so much free porn online that it just has to be feeding my nascent homosexuality.

why do religeous people lie to their flock (never a truer word spoken) and think it is correct to lie to a child?

Posted by: p0rtal00 on September 23, 2009 at 4:07 AM | PERMALINK

What I don' get is why they would state such a thing, and most of them are probably closet cases themselves. Which I don't understand why the government even cares about porn or any of i.It's not like they don't benefit from it themselves or their pockets so they need to keep quiet before someone else is on the six o'clock news being shown for having off relations with hookers, porn stars or any of the above lol.

Posted by: trevor on September 29, 2009 at 7:44 PM | PERMALINK

What a stupid, remark to make from a man in power, I'm 62yrs we did not have porn books in my school days or TV for several years. In puberty when boys are in the showers boys[and presume girls did/do]would look at their mates
genatalia, I know I did and in envy". We are all different in size shape and colour. I can look at both sex's and be turned on by both.
I have been married 3 times each one different
and while having sex was not thinking about sex with the boy down the road with a manhood twice
my size. With the web I can look at both sex's
naked, but do not like to see porn/in action.
I have sex regulary with an older lady, and masterbate in the privicy of my own home.
In early sixty's I was gang raped by three
older welsh guys, who were gentle as I gave in rather than be hurt/killed. I am not gay, but what does this say about me! I liked it!" but have not gone out on the razzle" I like the company of both sex's but between the sheets,
a womens breasts and body is all I want.
So am I WEIRD, OR GAY? 1st October 2009

Posted by: Peter on October 1, 2009 at 7:51 AM | PERMALINK

I think that what adults do and look at is their own private business and ultimately people will do what they want to do no matter what they see. However, I do think that pornography getting into the hands of kids who are not yet old enough to understand it all is not a good thing. I do think that kids are exposed to too much, too early these days. They need time to be kids before they have to start trying to figure out what their sexual orientation may or may not be.

Posted by: electronic cigarette on January 6, 2010 at 5:33 PM | PERMALINK

I swear I'll never understand people.

Posted by: shopalu on March 11, 2010 at 3:11 PM | PERMALINK

Could you help me. I have surfed to your site accidentally and can not break away from it. It is really great. Help me! Please help find sites for: Nova scotia student loan. I found only this - student loan statute of limitations. Student loan, despite having no most-microscopic country, hostettler's engineering was vast in important students. Student loan, equalization is finished by a part by wishing a volatility for artifice from the minimum loan. Best regards ;-), Horace from Guinea.

Posted by: Horace on March 31, 2010 at 2:14 AM | PERMALINK

If you arenot familiar with Michael Schwartz's work, he's quite a character.He's against judicial review.....
Very nice article,looking forward for your next article.

Posted by: MLM on April 23, 2010 at 2:23 PM | PERMALINK

make you gay...maaake you gaaaaaay...

Posted by: frank fnark on April 23, 2010 at 11:27 PM | PERMALINK

OH GHOD I put my sexual drive in the washer dryer and it turned inside out AND NOW I HAVE TEH GHEY AAAAAAAAA i'm fabulous

Posted by: Gay frank fnark on June 4, 2010 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly


Place Your Link Here

--- Links ---

Boarding Schools

Addiction Treatment Centers

Alcohol Treatment Center

Bad Credit Loan

Long Distance Moving Companies

FREE Phone Card

Flowers

Personal Loan

Addiction Treatment

Phone Cards

Less Debt = Financial Freedom

Addiction Treatment Programs