More free speech

Wal-Mart pulled Maxim, FHM and Stuff from its shelves. Plenty will criticize the store for various reasons, but Instant Replay firmly defends their decision.

Political perspective: as a private entity, Wal-Mart has the right to sell what it wants. Even the ACLU agrees with that, forced to defend freedom over its true love, licentiousness. Basically, as long as competitors are allowed to carry the magazine and consumers can choose where to shop, Wal-Mart can cater to whomever it wants. Pretty clear cut. What if every store in a city decided to pull the magazines? As long as subscriptions are available, that doesn't infringe on anyone's rights. Here the ACLU and I differ, but as long as there are no cartel or monopoly conditions, no seller can be coerced to offer a product they don't wish to - any more than government could force a strip club to open in a place where there was none available!

Economic perspective: this is a victory of the market, in part, though it wouldn't have occurred for solely market reasons. But look at the pressure put on Wal-Mart as economic demand for smut-free shopping centers. Wal-Mart is simply responding to demand, supplying a demanded service. If there is now a serious decrease in supply for the low-brow mags, it'll be filled by subscriptions and other suppliers. If all suppliers in a market cut the mags, again it's perfectly fine as long as there is no cartel or monopoly. If there is, it's the government's responsibility to open the market.

Theological perspective: it's important to remember when talking about sinful products and services that we're not called to form a theocracy, we're called to separate ourselves from a sinful world. On the other hand, all criminal legislation is morally based, so you can't say that the government doesn't legislate morality. Where do we draw the line? It's a gray area that should be constantly discussed. Child pornography is and should be banned because to create it involves abusing children, and to disseminate it encourages sexual acts with children, who are not mature enough to make sexual decisions or strong enough to resist violence. I would make the same argument against pornography - it should be banned because it exploits women and men and encourages readers to consider others as bodies to be used, not fellow citizens and humans. However, I don't think the government can outlaw fornication. Since it's a personal act, not mass-produced, not offered publically, and consensually engaged in, it's outside the scope of government regulation.

Secondly, Instant Replay applauds those who have applied pressure to Wal-Mart and others. The concept of communal responsibility has largely been lost in the U.S. While Christianity is not like Islam - where it's the woman's responsibility to dress modestly, not the man's to control his thoughts - we are commanded to act in ways that will help our brothers and sisters and not cause them to stumble. It is ultimately a man's decision to buy or not to buy Maxim, but his neighbors can help protect a man weak in that area by not making it readily available every time he goes to buy a light bulb or Cheetos.