The Kansas House advanced a nonbinding resolution Wednesday that declares pornography a “public health hazard.”

House Resolution 6016 has the strong backing of two conservative Christian organizations, American Family Action of Kansas and Missouri, and Family Policy Alliance of Kansas. Lobbyists from both organizations testified in favor of the resolution in the Federal and State Affairs Committee earlier in March. An identical resolution is pending in the Kansas Senate.

Although it does not enact any new laws or regulations, it makes a sense-of-the-House statement that pornography is “a public health hazard that leads to a broad spectrum of individual and public health impacts and societal harms.”

The resolution also does not direct county health departments or any other public agency charged with addressing public health hazards to take any specific actions regarding pornography. It does, however, state that “we recognize the need for additional education, prevention, research and policy change at the community and societal levels, and we urge this chamber and other governing bodies to take appropriate steps to ensure progress is made.”

“The data is increasingly undeniable and disturbing,” Rep. Chuck Weber, R-Wichita, said. “Pornography correlates with a wide range of negative health outcomes including violence against women, child abuse, divorce, prostitution, sex trafficking and addiction.”

Rep. John Carmichael, D-Wichita, was the only member of the House who spoke against the resolution. He pointed to such works of art as Michelangelo’s sculpture of David and passages in William Shakespeare’s play “Romeo and Juliet” as examples of things that some people could construe as pornographic.

Weber, however, shrugged off those suggestions as “ludicrous.”

Carmichael further explained his taking exception: “I hope that members of this House, my constituents and the citizens of this state understand that my vote ‘no’ today, and presumably on final action (Thursday) is not meant as encouragement of violent and graphic depictions, but rather it is in defense of freedom, liberty and the First Amendment, despite the fact that the price of freedom is high.”