While the host Larry Mantle was balanced, Adam Cohen of AHF used his standard slippery logic. But Mantle wasn’t having it — when he grilled Cohen about his STI numbers, Cohen admitted it didn’t matter to him if transmissions were on-set or off-set. APAC treasurer Ela Darling called in, to talk about the way performers can be sued and harassed under his legislation — the “Sue-a-performer” provision, which Adam was forced to admit was, in fact, part of the enforcement strategy.
I think that most of the comments on the article have been anti-AHF is pretty telling.
Don D “I can’t make sense of it, it is such a low ROI effort. What I mean by that is that I believe both the rate as well as especially the numbers of AIDS and HIV in porn are lower than in the general population, mainly because of a more rigorous testing schedule. So the benefits in terms of lower number of infections are negligible.
Getting a statewide proposition on the ballot is not cheap. I would guesstimate that they are spending multiples of what they spent on the countywide effort, definitely in the seven figures.
If the stated intent is to fight AIDS, the money they are using here would provide better outcomes if spent on outreach, education, making treatment more available, and furthering research into improved drugs.”
Tony Lima “More job-killing legislation. Good for Nevada’s economy”.
This IS plain and simple…Moralistic legislation.”
“In ten years every porn movie will be a sci-fi epic where the performers will wear space suits to be Cal OSHA compliant.”
What will be interesting (if this stupid idea were to become reality), is how few solid, law-abiding citizens will actually bother to lodge legal action against non-condom adult video. My prognostication would be ZERO, unless AHF starts paying people to do so.
I can think of many anti porners who would jump at the chance to file…