Imposing a 10 percent excise tax on pornography, as a special panel of Kansas lawmakers recommended Wednesday, hardly seems worth it, given the constitutional concerns and the inevitable lawsuits. But it will be interesting to see how the no-new-taxes-never-ever crowd in the Kansas Legislature votes on this issue. Are they OK with new taxes as long as they apply to behaviors or products they don’t like?
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
24 Comments
Could be an enforcement nightmare. Would this apply only to items bought at certain stores, or would it include ‘racy’ movies from Blockbuster or WalMart? I am sure that Operation Southwind wants to burn every movie except Disney, so they would push for taxing all the ‘nasty’ stuff they can.
Change behavior by taxing things the lawmakers don’t like? Interesting concept…except you cannot legislate (or tax into being) morality? George Orwell’s thought police are not here..yet.
Ray I agree, except that we’d have to also tax Disney, as they’ve been slipping adult inuendo into their animated kids films for some time now. Yes, for the almighty buck.
Contrary Mr. Brownlee’s take, a new tax would appear to put the state in the pornography biz, by virtue of the tax revenue gained. Thus there would be incentive for the state to promulgate rather than restrict pornography.I would oppose the additional tax on those grounds. I don’t think the state wants to get in bed, so to speak, with the pornography industry.
Dudley they are already getting a piece of the action on most other “sins” like gambling, drinking, smoking, etc.Why settle for half measures?Just like a mob boss, they need their protection money.
Phillip’s Question: “Are they OK with new taxes as long as they apply to behaviors or products they don’t like?”
Doesn’t this seem like an opportunity for unmanagable cognitive dissonance for the likes of Brenda Landwehr and Susan Wagle?
We cognitive dissidents, who will be watching, will sure enjoy it!!!
Gee, with all that money flowing into the state treasury, we will have a good reason to make sure the porn shops stay in business, and Kansans keep patronizing them!Support your local schools- buy porn!
These commercial enterprises already pay their fair share of taxes – property, sales, income. Let’s tax an entity that has been allowed to shirk its tax responsibility – the churches.
Here Here, Ben!! I love it! Especially the churches that have been so heavily involved in political activity. They have become PAC’s, and should be taxed like it.
The lobbying by pastors on the marriage amendment; the circulation of anti porn petitions during/after services; the organized abortion protests. These are all examples of political action, not worship. The churches involved should lose their tax exempt status immediately.
Steven,”We cognitive dissidents, who will be watching, will sure enjoy it!!!”That will be 10%, please.
Is it OK if it’s a menage a trois with a veolvet painting that shifts from Elvis to Jesus in the background?
Brian…I doubt it…. Elvis and a Matador maybe.. Jesus has very little to do with any of this. The only people that really got on his nerves were the religious zealots of his time.Jed… LOL!!!!
JM,That was a good one. lol
Sam :-))
Right on Ben! I was just thinking the same thing as I was reading through this blog. Churches now play a different role in society then they used to. They influence there memebers to support them on conservative social issues – therefore they should lose their tax exempt status.
oops! I am still asleep *their – not there :0)
LoL, at work last night I fellow employee was complaining about this issue. Saying that this was just a way for the state to make money and will not stop it. They are just making money off of those addicted to porn and that it is not right!
He is a non-smoker and I told him now he knows how us smokers feel.
Actually, those statues and paintings of the naked baby Jesus, and all those Putti figures (some mis-call them cherubs) that adorn many Catholic churches may fall under the legal definition of child pornography. Should we tax them 10% of their take for displaying them?
I guess the people of operation southwind are all still virgins. Seeing as how sex is immoral and pornographic. Too bad their parent didn’t stay virgins. I guess 99% of the planets adult population are all going to burn for commiting such obscenities. What about Adam and Eve, if the bible story were true then wouldn’t that mean that there would had to of been some incest going on at some point? How else would our entire planet have become populated from just 1 man and 1 woman?
And where did Cain and Able’s wives come from anyway?
I think this is totally disgusting. There is also a recent bill on the table to remove billboards advertising the sex industry in Kansas, b/c these “wholesome” folks are offended. I think personally they should avoid all the crapola psalms & such that are posted along the highway as well. Hey, if you’re gonna screw the “sinful” bunch, why discriminate? Screw those who openly practice their religion in the face of those who are offended by it as well.
I’ve read conflicting reports that the KS House is trying to apply upwards of 50% tax (but most reports settle on a 25% tax, already in progress) on all “sinful” goods, esp. those related to the adult industry ~ dildos, magazines, flicks, etc. The bigger sin is that these “non-judgemental” religious folk should isolate themselves to ONE part of the country, so they aren’t alienating those who DO enjoy viewing & using such products.
I say, “TOUGH SHIT”, these moral crusaders (a term I use courtesy of George Carlin) are ruining the rights & freedoms in this country…not a bunch of towelheads in the Middle East. Why not sick the militia against them…b/c our administration supports it, that’s why! :(
After reading the comments, and before spouting off my hot-headedness, allow me to apologize for my “TS” comment (but I still meant it) for those who found it terribly offensive, lol.
Ben & Ray…kudos! We agree on many points, if not for perhaps different reasons. Churches, esp. those who partake in publicly offering up shelter (financial, physical, etc.) to politicians should be taxed until they close their doors. Funny how the moral right & their gathering places don’t get taxed, but what’s considered “sinful” is being taken to the level of potential extinction? Sounds like the deck is stacked against to me, no? Unless many other states support this, the only thing this will do is alienate the pro-porn citizens of Kansas. Hopefully, this doesn’t become more widespread than the “wholesome” states.
Elegant Angel Productions did the courtesy of allowing their viewers to see what zip codes are currently enforcing “no porn” zones. It’s a shame to see that our country has gotten this ridiculously calous that we have to infringe on the rights of our own people, and we’re more worried about those in lands thousands of miles away.
Wow. People who believe churches don’t get investigated by the IRS really don’t know what the hell they’re talking about. Nice to see who’s completely lost his mind among the WE bloggerheads! :)
Never said they didn’t get investigated, but they certainly work the system. Don’t believe any different, Crusader.
Eric,Prove that churches “work the system.”