|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
In a notable departure from her party’s traditional stance on privacy, state Rep. Susan DuBose, R-Hoover, has announced her intention to introduce legislation that would restrict minors’ access to online pornography, as first reported by Alabama Daily News. This effort is part of DuBose’s wider campaign to enforce a stricter moral code in Alabama’s public domain, including challenging the content of the state’s public libraries and proposing legal definitions for gender identity.
DuBose’s position holds that, rather than parents guiding their children on what books to read and monitoring their internet browsing, it’s the state’s job to regulate what was once thought to be an aspect of good parenting.
The “porn ID law,” as proposed, would require pornographic websites to verify the age of visitors by mandating the submission of a photo ID before granting access. DuBose’s initiative responds to the concerns expressed by parents and grandparents about the widespread exposure of young adolescents, especially boys aged 10 to 12, to pornographic material online.
“I’ve had parents and grandparents come to me very concerned about their 10 to 12-year-old boys because they’re so engaged with their computers,” DuBose said. “We know statistically that the majority of 10 to 12-year-olds have already seen porn on the internet; that’s how prevalent it is. It’s damaging and addictive to young minds,” she told ADN.
DuBose believes that the legislation is necessary not only to protect minors from early exposure to adult content but also because she sees a connection between unrestricted internet access and the increasing number of young girls identifying as transgender—a claim for which she has yet to provide empirical evidence.
“Honestly, that’s one reason we see so many females thinking that they are transgender,” DuBose stated.
Her proposal reflects measures already enacted in Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and other states as a result of the coordinated efforts of conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation. In some states, major adult content platforms have chosen to withdraw their services rather than face substantial daily fines for non-compliance.
The Heritage Foundation, often frames social issues from a perspective that emphasizes traditional values, including the significance of marriage and the family unit. Their viewpoint on the deregulation of pornography reflects concerns about the broader impact on society’s moral framework and the potential for negative consequences resulting from increased accessibility and normalization of pornography.
The argument suggests that while proponents of pornography deregulation have framed it as a matter of personal liberty and a step away from sexual repression, critics believe that it has contributed to a culture that places a high value on sexual self-expression, sometimes to the detriment of other values, such as relational commitment and familial stability.
Scott Yenor wrote at the Foundation in 2020, “The deregulation of pornography is part of a larger sexual revolution, which aimed to loosen Americans’ attachment to marriage, subordinating sex within an enduring, faithful community of love and responsibility. Advocates sought to deregulate pornography in the name of liberty and with the hopes of ending sexual repression. This deregulation cultivates a culture emphasizing sexual self-expression but has also had many unexpected side effects. Generally, Internet pornography is much more akin to an addiction than anyone had thought. Its harms may be less spectacular than opponents of pornography feared, but they are also deeper and more difficult to reverse. Its effects are indirect and subtle, not direct, and its frequent consumption undermines the institutions that make relational beings happy.”
The proposed legislation has encountered resistance from those who view it as a potential infringement on First Amendment rights and individual privacy. Critics argue that mandatory age verification could result in websites retaining sensitive user identification data, thus facilitating outsourced censorship.
In a recent legal precedent, U.S. District Judge David Ezra overturned a comparable Texas law, raising constitutional concerns about free speech and privacy. The requirement to use government-issued ID for age verification was criticized for potentially deterring adults from accessing legal content and for risking the exposure of private details to the state government.
Amid the growing debate, DuBose remains steadfast, positioning herself as a champion against what she considers moral decline, potentially setting the stage for a significant legal confrontation over free speech, privacy, and the state’s role in internet regulation.
Annually, Alabama spends millions of taxpayer dollars on legal battles over privacy issues. The state has incurred approximately $2 million in legal fees defending its law that prohibits treatment for transgender youths.
As a first-term lawmaker, DuBose’s many crusades mark her as a serious culture warrior, staring down the ever-rising tide of modernity.
