What little I've read about Anthony Comstock makes wonder what effects Comstock's would have on the United States?
WI: Anthony Comstock has killed during the Civil War?
- Thread starter nick_crenshaw82
- Start date
The moral crusaders would have lost the man who would have funded them.
The United States would be weaker and a more dangerous place to live. It would also be a lot more fun
The United States would be weaker and a more dangerous place to live. It would also be a lot more fun
In the 1880s and 1890s drug use and alcoholism were rampant and we're responsible for the highest crime rates in American history. Just dealing with that was a major expense that prevented other issues from being addressed. Prostitution, Gambling and a lot of recreational drugs would be legal in many states bringing with it lots of problems.
Prohibition brought a lot of its own problems… like the rise of organized crime.
Last edited:
I also imagine there were other moral crusaders who were more moderate in their crusades. Comstock's personal views were fairly extreme and without his campaign we may have had an earlier sexual revolution and his obscenity censorship laws were very vague and in a roundabout way contributed to anti-comic book laws in the late 1940s.
He also promoted censorship (which violates freedom of speech) and book burnings, so I would argue that him not encouraging those evils would be an improvement.
Those why I wonder what the US would like if he died. Who else existed at that time with similar more moderate beliefs to replace him?
Was there anyone else as extreme and popular as Anthony Comstock while Comstock was alive?
iddt3
Donor
Eh, I would argue that gambling is not victimless, it exploits a cognitive Blindspot in humans around probability. It's a scam as much as any other con.
*edit* at least as run by casinos and bookies. I have much less issue with gambling among friends, as that massively reduces the chance of ruining yourself.
Well, prostitution does, if it the person is forced into it through force or blackmail then yeah it is not victimless. Gambling also can ruin someone's life, if they gamble all of their money away their family can be screwed.
Not really, in prostitution there's human trafficking and gambling can bankrupt families if gambling addiction is involved.
You're missing the point. Human trafficking is a crime, because it is not victimless. And gambling could include cheating/stacking the odds, which would also not be victimless. But vices are not crimes, and you adding additional factors doesn't make the initial action a crime.
I'm not missing the point, I'm well that both are not victimless crimes I was trying to explaining that it's not their business. This whole thing started as attempt to butterfly away the Comstock laws which were the bases for other similar censorship laws including the Comics Code Authority:
