Breaking News: Porn film showing cancelled at UMD after legislative pressure
Inside Charm City received the following email in response to our previous post from an administrative assistant to Senator Simonaire:
“The showing of the triple X film has been cancelled at the University of Maryland. Senator Andy Harris presented an amendment to the budget bill on the floor of the Senate to pull funding to the University of MD.”
UPDATE
WBAL AM finally picked the story up after we beat them to the punch by a hour or so:
C.D. Mote Jr., President of the University of Maryland in College Park, decided to cancel the midnight screening in the campus theatre at the Stamp Student Union.
His decision came today after state lawmakers took to the floor of the Senate and threatened to cut funding to the university of the film was screened this weekend.
Their story (at the link above) also includes audio of Senator Andy Harris from the Senate floor. NBC Washington has more here and here.
28 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
1
Bravo, Senator Harris! They won’t see another dime in donations from me, even though my daughter is a student there.
Comment by Ron Miller — April 2, 2009 @ 12:38 pm
2
[...] Inside Charm City received the following email in response (posted here) to this post from an administrative assistant to Senator Simonaire: “The showing of the triple X [...]
Pingback by Hard-core porn film being shown at University of MD — April 2, 2009 @ 12:42 pm
3
Really? So the Senate would have pulled the funding of an entire university just for showing a porn film that 18 year olds could choose to attend or not? LMAO… I’d like to see how my mom would reacts when she realizes she’s fired because the university wasn’t recieving the funding to pay her because they did something that was perfectly legal.
Comment by Nick Geigle — April 2, 2009 @ 12:55 pm
4
Good job dandy andy… First you lose CD-1 to the Dems and then you threaten UMD? A public university?? UMD is not the same as Liberty university, sorry bud
Comment by Steve — April 2, 2009 @ 1:27 pm
5
Way to go Andy! Thank you for standing up for what is RIGHT!
Comment by Ashley — April 2, 2009 @ 1:35 pm
6
Thank you Steve. Ashley, I’d like to refer you to my comment. Imagine if my mom lost her job -let alone all the students, faculty, and staff affected- becuz some lawmaker decided that he thought it was so morally reprehensible to show a porno on campus, that he decided to pull state funding. That to me doesn’t sound like the RIGHT thing to do, and is a terrible decision making process. I think that deciding to show communal pornography is something that isn’t moral at worst, and makes for an awkward situation at best. But making a decision that rash to pull funding causes far greater detriment to a far greater number of people than the very few people who actually DECIDE to go see it. Simply letting it go and not making a big deal about it, or simply finding another course of action to prevent the screening, would’ve been the correct course of action. I feel lucky that he does not represent me (live in PA). I would never want someone like that putting my state university at risk because he doesn’t agree with a tiny and temporary problem, that tomorrow would’ve been yesterday’s news.
Comment by Nick — April 2, 2009 @ 1:59 pm
7
So Nick, you got a lot to say about the UofMd and Maryland politicians for
someone who pays no taxes in Maryland. Taxes that support the university. I do pay taxes in Maryland and I agree with Senator Harris and Ashley.
Comment by Bill — April 2, 2009 @ 8:47 pm
8
Well I live in Maryland and I pay a ton of taxes here…
And I agree with Nick. Neither Andy Harris’ nor your personal mortality should be forced upon a public institution. I agree, pornography is not exactly classy, and while you or I may not approve of it personally in our own lives, it is a free expression permitted by the first amendment of the Constitution, you remember, that document that makes this country great?
I think Andy Harris has done enough in the last few months, don’t you? (LIKE..losing a safe Republican seat that NEVER would’ve gone Democrat otherwise… haven’t forgotten about that one, maybe you have) I mean talk about losing the principle of limited government…
We have enough ideologues in this state, Harris on the one side, and plenty on the other. We have too many pressing issues facing our state, and this forced imposition of morals and spineless threats towards UMD (which btw, we’re in an economic crisis and he wants to put more jobs in OUR STATE at risk by threatening their budget???) His actions do not help at all to move our state forward.
Comment by Steve — April 3, 2009 @ 8:14 am
9
I’m certainly no right-wing moralist, but showing a porn film on campus??? I’m glad SOMEONE in MD’s state legislature had the cojones to stand up for common sense.
But what confounds me even more is that most colleges and universities refused to allow movies like PASSION OF THE CHRIST to be screened, yet a hard-core porn gets a pass? I certainly don’t believe that conservatives should be imposing their viewpoints on anyone. And I think it’s equally irritating when radical liberal secular progressives do the same under the guise of “free speech” (when what they really want to do is stifle the opinions of those with whom they disagree).
If college kids want to watch porn so badly, then they should use the internet. And while they’re glued to their monitors, they can support their local businesses in these economic hard times by buying beer and ordering out for pizza.
Comment by Joe - Foreign Film Reviewer — April 3, 2009 @ 9:19 am
10
I guess if you consider Wayne Gilchrest a Republican you might have a point there Steve. As an elected representive of lots of Maryland taxpayers, Andy Harris was doing exactly what he was supposed to do and that is represent the will of the people. Spineless threats? You think Harris was spineless to threatened to pull funds from UMD? It was the total opposite of spineless. We do Steve have many pressing issues in this state and perhaps whether or not showing a porno flick at UMD isn’t one of them, or perhaps whether or not changing the words to Maryland My Maryland isn’t one of them either; however the leading learning and research public institution in this state shouldn’t be leading the charge to move this state forward by condoning and allowing porno flicks to be shown on campus at taxpayers expense especially using the lame excuse that it will keep the students off the streets and prevent student drinking. You do recall these are the same ‘learned invididuals’ who called for lowering the drinking age as a method to curtail student drinking.
Comment by Bill — April 3, 2009 @ 9:21 am
11
It wasn’t just the “nutty” Republicans pushing this. Senate President Mike Miller, a Dem and one of the biggest supporters of UMCP in the legislature, said he would support Harris’ amendment over this issue.
Comment by Stan Moore — April 3, 2009 @ 9:24 am
12
Bill — If you read the previous article it says “The distributor of the film, Digital Playground, offered it to the student union for free, so student activities fees are not being used to finance it.” so this wouldn’t have been shown at the taxpayers expense.
And yes, Bill, Wayne Gilchrest was a fine Republican, if Andy cared about the party, he would’ve waited his turn for an open seat.
Comment by Steve — April 3, 2009 @ 1:00 pm
13
Is the Hoff Theater located on campus? Who pays the utility bills? Who pays the projectionist?
Who pays the folks that clean up the theater? Gilchrest is not a ‘fine Republican’. I have a
very difficult time distinguishing between an ‘Obama is the Messiah fanatic’ type person and Gilchrest. If Gilchrest ‘cared’ about the party he would have acted like a loyal Republican instead of the turncoat he is. Of course it came as no susprise to me that Gilchrest voted Democratic this past presidential election, just look at his Congressional career. He voted for Obama, the most liberal Senator in the US Senate. Yea, Gilchrest is a ‘fine Republican’.
Comment by Bill — April 3, 2009 @ 9:38 pm
14
Bill, I’ve got to hand it to you. You keep finding ways to damage your credibility on this issue. Granted, my credibility is somewhat damaged by the fact that I don’t pay taxes in Maryland, but my mom works at UMD, so it would still have a direct effect on me. Your comments make me wonder how much you’ve actually read the article. “Is the Hoff Theater located on campus? Who pays the utility bills? Who pays the projectionist? Who pays the folks that clean up the theater?” In the article it says, “The admission cost of $4 dollars will cover the cost of staffing the film.” They have gone out of their way NOT to incur cost on the tax payer. Joe, cite a specific university that refused to show Passion of the Christ, and you’d have a terrific point. Also, how did Republicans and Dems get brought into this? Stan pointed out that Dem Mike Miller also supported this mind numbingly stupid (but admittedly ballsy)tact. Whether it’s employed by a Dem or a Republican, it’s equally as stupid. What if the University didn’t back down -they shouldn’t have! If that ammendment actually passed, there would be a lot of explaining to do- then what would’ve happened? You think the people of MD would actually support a legislature that cut their state school’s funding because they tried to backdoor a way to get rid of a porn film and it blew up in their face?
Comment by Nick — April 4, 2009 @ 11:44 am
15
The cost of the tickets would have paid for all direct costs associated with the showing. What will the next step be ? Stopping Playboy from being delivered to mail boxes on campus ? The social conservatives should be ashamed at this censorship
Comment by John Ryan — April 4, 2009 @ 12:29 pm
16
Sorry Nick, I could care less if your mom, dad, uncle, brother, sister and cousins worked at UMD. You don’t and you don’t live in Maryland and you don’t pay taxes in Maryland, so as far as I am concerned your opinion doesn’t matter at all. I doubt if 4 bucks a head would cover all costs incurred. Bottom line, UMD is a public tax-payer funded institution, therefore UMD must dance to the tune that the taxpayers play. Andy Harris and Mike Miller represent the taxpayers of Maryland and they didn’t like the idea of a taxpayer funded institution showing porno flicks to college students. And what better way to get the attention of the UMD officials then by threatening to stop funding them, I ask you? The message was very clear and it certainly didn’t go through the backdoor. It sailed through the front door, without knocking, and hit them smack dab where it hurt the most. To answer your last question, yes I do. You think the people of MD want their state school to be known as the porno palace of higher learning?
If the students want to watch a porno flick, I’m sure favorable arrangements can be made with a theater in the DC area.
Comment by Bill — April 4, 2009 @ 12:58 pm
17
I don’t know John, but research how many government employees were disiplined or lost their jobs for looking at porno on taxpayer paid-for computers. And it didn’t matter if they were on the clock or not. Is that censorship? Heck, I know folks we got into loads of trouble using their taxpayer paid for computer to complete their NCAA basketball brackets. Censorship? What is the difference between a taxpayer paid for building and a taxpayer paid for computer?
Comment by Bill — April 4, 2009 @ 1:28 pm
18
Bill, you might live in Maryland, but since you’re such an outspoken social conservative here, I’m willing to go out on a limb and bet that you don’t live in Montgomery County where WE pay the highest taxes and foot the bill for the rest of the state.
And since I do, I pay some of the highest taxes in the state and in the country for that matter, I have no problem in sharing the fact that UMD is a PUBLIC university and should be free to screen whatever movie it pleases. It’s free expression, I don’t like porn, and I wouldn’t choose to watch it if I was a UMD student, but WHO CARES? Go bowling, watch the NCAA tournament, go to the gym…there’s plenty of other alternatives to watching a movie if you don’t like it than having the neocon Andy Harris types in the General Assembly threaten to cut off the budget.
Comment by Jack — April 4, 2009 @ 2:41 pm
19
Look, if they stopped the funding to UMD, it wouldn’t have just affected my mom, but everyone that attends UMD (mostly MD residents). By “backdoor”, I meant underhanded. What better way to get the attention of the UMD officials? How about talking to the UMD officials? Noticie nowhere in his audio did he say that he had talked directly to the UMD officials, rather, he had talked to the lobbyists. That’s the kind of stuff that makes me angry, this beurocratic adding of unrelated stuff to the end of a bill. His audio is a compelling personal argument, and I wish he would’ve simply brought it to the University rather than pass an ammendment. Don’t use a bazooka to kill a fly.
Comment by Nick — April 4, 2009 @ 3:04 pm
20
Nick I doubt if it ever would have gotten that far. It is a moot point anyway, UMD officials came to there senses after the pols spoke to them in the only language they fully understand.
Jack keep that money rolling in and thanks! You are correct I do not live in Montgomery county, of which I am thankful. I DO hunt Montgomery county though, Mckee-Besher. Good size deer there.
And sorry no, UMD shouldn’t be free to screen any movie it chooses. I think that point has been made by Senators Harris and Miller.
Comment by Bill — April 4, 2009 @ 10:06 pm
21
Looks like Harris is gonna lose this battle just like he lost CD-1
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/04/AR2009040402590.html?wprss=rss_metro
Glad the students aren’t gonna let big brother creep into their university too!
Comment by Steve — April 5, 2009 @ 8:58 pm
22
[...] Breaking News: Porn film showing cancelled at UMD after legislative pressure Hard-core porn film being shown at University of [...]
Pingback by Students still plan on showing porn film on campus — April 6, 2009 @ 8:30 am
23
Kudos to Andy Harris. To show porn on campus, in state run buildings, with state funds, is reprehensible – but awesomely ridiculous. Why don’t we just pay for their Internet porn 900 #’s and call girls as well? I have a hard enough time processing how the University of Maryland (i.e. taxpayers) pay full tuition for ‘genius’ kids from other countries, who aren’t citizens, and whose parents don’t pay state taxes because they live in India or China. Then after graduation, these kids who had a free ride, go home. Nope, I sure as heck am not paying for something that has no educational value. You can call a pig ‘princess’ but I think we know the difference.
Comment by Lisa — April 6, 2009 @ 5:12 pm
24
This is absurd. You think that $4 tickets won’t cover operating costs? Box office staff makes $6.75/hr, and a projectionist makes all of $8.05/hr. (source: http://www.thestamp.umd.edu/employment/student.shtml) Given the size of Stamp, running a projector costs a negligible fraction of the power consumed daily by the building. And I assure you that heat/AC runs in the Hoff regardless of occupancy. If 20 people attend (and now more will), the State’s costs will be covered.
The news said that funding would be cut for ANY building where porn COULD be shown?? Has the Senate decided to halt all work on the new Journalism building? Will they ignore the housing crisis, because some residents MIGHT watch porn? Oh, and what about the Human Sexuality class – will it be yanked from the course offerings in case somebody is offended (or aroused) by a PowerPoint?
Comment by Rosie — April 6, 2009 @ 10:37 pm
25
[...] to use school expenditures to show a pornographic film on campus. While the initial proposal was dropped, the matter became a topic of discussion in state government and on local radio. Needless to say, [...]
Pingback by College Controversy Exemplifies the Challenges We Face. | NextGenGOP.com | The Future of the Republican Party — April 6, 2009 @ 11:51 pm
26
Bill, you need to stop acting as if you are the only tax payer in maryland. My parents both pay a ridiculous amount of taxes each year in Maryland and so does plenty of my relatives. I also attend the school and therefore understand the politcs at the school. I agree that the school shouldn’t have tried to show a prono -not because it is morrally wrong but because as edcuational institue where there are already students who have sexual addiction, including to prono (there is help at the Health center) the school should be condoning it. However, Harris was even worse for trying to stop school funding, especially considering that the university is the state’s flagship univeristy and is already going through massive budget cut. It was a completely stupid threat. As a student of the university, I feel offended that Harris thinks he can call for a cut in funding to my school whenever he feels that it isn’t living up to his moral expectations.
Comment by nelly — April 7, 2009 @ 1:20 am
27
Nice censorship. So let me get this straight, young adults are allowed to watch movies where someone hacks up people repeatedly with a nife, shoots hundreds with a gun, tortures and mames people (all that is ok for our youth to watch). Yet it is a sin to watch people have sex or make love on the big screen? to me alot of you have your values totlay screwed up!
Comment by Mike — April 7, 2009 @ 9:46 am
28
Nelly, I am sure your parents are very proud of you for standing up for the rights of pornographers everywhere. You are offended by Senator Harris’ actions, but not your fellow students actions with regards to the showing of the movie. Telling Nelly. Showing a porno flick at the school doesn’t really affect you Nelly, but slicing the budget could affect you, therefore porno ok, Senator Harris bad.
Comment by Bill — April 7, 2009 @ 6:15 pm