The ink was barely dry on Utah’s age verification law for accessing adult content before porn purveyors dispatched their lawyers to try to delay it. The law, sponsored by state Senator Todd Weiler, requires sites with adult content to verify a user’s age before letting them view the material on the site. It went into effect May 3. Louisiana enacted a similar law last year.
The Associated Press reported that the group, the Free Speech Coalition, and its fellow plaintiffs hold that the law violates their First Amendment Rights and impacts the privacy of Utah residents who want to view porn. In their Wednesday filing the plaintiffs stated:
The Act is a poorly crafted solution to a poorly articulated problem, and the public interest is not advanced by the endurance of an overly restrictive, vague, and overbroad statute that imperils the rights of Utahns to provide and receive constitutionally-protected material over the internet.
The Free Speech Coalition is made up of erotica authors, sex educators, and adult entertainers. The group maintains that the law creates an unconstitutional burden for website operators, content creators, and, well, anyone who surfs porn. Attorney Gill Sperlein argued that the law was inflicting free speech and financial harm on such websites, which would continue to suffer that harm while the case plays out in court. Thus the need for an injunction.
Depending on whom you ask, Utah either does or does not lead the nation in online porn usage. A Harvard study listed the Beehive State as #1 in the nation. But Pornhub claims that its stats from 2013 had Utah at #40. And it seems predictable that Pornhub would say that. That information comes from an article in Deseret News. The same piece stated:
While publications in the past have reported Utah as having the highest rate of pornography usage in the country, this narrative appears to be based on a single nearly 15-year-old study about “subscriptions” to a website that still remains anonymous.
The article also calls the data from the Harvard study into question, noting that it focused on people who paid for online access as opposed to viewing the material for free. Another factor the paper cited may be the low number of strip clubs in Utah. Which is hardly surprising, given the religion of the majority of the population. There are data, according to the article, that would indicate that porn usage is extremely low here because of the religious and conservative makeup of Utah. But if you talk to the locals, many will concur that porn is a problem in the state.
Being a non-native and a non-member of the LDS church, I have often heard my fellow transplants grouse about how restrictive the laws are here. The common complaint was that it was time for Utah to catch up with the 20th century. Well, it’s the 21st century now. I don’t know about where you live, but in Utah, there is a code on the back of one’s driver’s license or state ID that must be scanned when purchasing tobacco products or alcohol. To that end, unless you are buying beer or something akin to a wine cooler or hard lemonade, the only place you can purchase alcohol is at a state liquor store. I remember after having lived in Utah for some time, I made a foray into Colorado and thought, “Wow, there are sure a lot of liquor stores here.” Of course, the truth is that there aren’t very many liquor stores in Utah. And if you want to order a case of wine or just a few bottles, it is illegal to have them shipped into the state. A California vineyard once tried to convince me that it could deliver directly to my door. After a few questions, I realized that they just planned to have someone bootleg the wine for me. Make no mistake, it would be great if I could have some of my favorite wineries send a case of malbec or sauvignon blanc to my house. It would save a drive into Salt Lake when I wanted a more obscure label. But even if that were the case, I wouldn’t give any to my grandkids. Hell, if it was good wine, I wouldn’t give any to my kids and they are all in their 30s.
The argument is that people have a right to enjoy their legal sexual proclivities in private. But involving children is illegal, and a legitimate company should have no issue with protecting children from viewing its products. Legal or not, porn often involves human trafficking, including the use of minors. It adversely affects the lives of the people who make it along with the lives of those who view it. It can destroy marriages and other relationships and even individuals. And it can have a horrific effect on children who view it.
I know that there is an argument that it is the job of the parent and not the state to protect their children from porn. And I also realize that kids will find a workaround when it comes to the verification process. But does that mean that no safeguards should be in place? Then, of course, there is the issue of whether or not porn is protected speech, and if a law like this one can lead to a slippery slope when it comes to viewing things such as Michelangelo’s “David” or Botticelli’s “Birth of Venus.” And can it be co-opted and applied to anything someone finds objectionable? For example, the Davis School District in Farmington, Utah, has decided to pull the Bible from the shelves of elementary and middle school libraries. KSL wrote:
The identity of the person who requested a review of the Bible was redacted in a copy of the challenge provided to KSL.com by Davis School District officials.
“Utah Parents United left off one of the most sex-ridden books around: The Bible,” the person wrote, noting that the Bible includes mentions of incest, bestiality, prostitution, genital mutilation, and rape, among other things.
The individual also included an eight-page document of specific Bible verses to substantiate their claim that the Bible includes many examples of the sensitive materials that have led to the removal of other books.
“You’ll no doubt find that the Bible, under Utah Code Ann. § 76-10-1227, has ‘no serious values for minors’ because it’s pornographic by our new definition. Get this PORN out of our schools! If the books that have been banned so far are any indication for way lesser offenses, this should be a slam dunk,” the person wrote.
The challenge was in response to HB374, a bill that was designed to locate and remove explicit material from schools. In other words, if there can’t be sexually oriented material in schools, there can’t be any Bibles, either. Because of course Gender Queer, This Book Is Gay, and the Bible are practically indistinguishable, right? I’ve read enough articles to know the answer to that question.
In the end, the issue comes down to a problem that has dogged man since he first walked upright. That is, “I want what I want when I want it, and any consequences be dammed.” The question for those who advocate for no age verification is this: at the end of all things, is this really what you will want to be known for?
Join the conversation as a VIP Member