Something occurred to me when reading of how the Justice Department wants a week of Google search records, ostensibly to enforce the failed law against Internet pornography, but with authority under the Patriot Act.

This is getting someone’s rocks off.

We all know that, for many people, fear is part of their sex drive. Whether it’s fear of discovery or the ability to instill fear in others, it’s real. And both these fantasies are threatened in an open sexual environment. It’s like the movie Monsters Inc. – what are you going to do if the kids can’t be scared anymore? (In the end Sulley, pictured, found he could produce a lot more energy with laughter than with fear. That’s an important lesson.)

This aspect of sexuality is, on the whole, far less healthy than an appetite for seeing naked bodies, private parts, even things going into things. Fear can be harnessed in sexual play of many kinds, but its abuse is more physically dangerous than, say, voyeurism is. Abusive voyeurism is a Peeping Tom. Abusive fear junkies become sadists, rapists and murderers.

But it’s obvious, from the history of the last few decades, that many of those advocating the elimination of porn have sexual kinks themselves. For some it’s mere repression, but for others it’s a form of sadism. Keeping others down gets them off.

And this sadism, under the guise of moral certitude, is driving much of our sexual law enforcement. Make it dirty, make it forbidden, make it sordid, make it hidden. Then, in the dark, where no one can see, the sadist can do whatever he wants.

This is the dark side of sexual repression, and it crosses religious boundaries. Muslim men hide the sexuality of Muslim women because they fear even the sight of a face will drive them mad. Christians are sometimes no better. Jews the same. It’s not everyone, but it’s a dominant theme in the “conservative” strain of all these religions, forcing sex into the shadows, yet somehow the babies come. Lots of ‘em. (Pictured is Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, who wrote memos endorsing torture before leaving to head up the White House War on Porn. Something to think about there.)

This uneven relationship between the sexes – the male all-powerful, the female powerless – is said to be ordained by God. Before the rise of modern medicine, in fact, it was ordained by evolution. The way to make sure you’d be followed by 2 adult children was to start by making 8 or 10. With modern medicine this behavior is the Malthusian nightmare.

I am not saying here that all anti-porn advocates are closet sadists. There are many sincere people of faith who believe “protecting” women respects them, and who act accordingly, both with their spouses and with children. But the many scandals of the past decades show this isn’t true for all. And what of their “libertarian” allies? How clean are their hands, and minds?

Back to Google. What is the search engine’s role in keeping pornography out of the hands of children, whom we all accept don’t want it and might be harmed by it? What should it be? There’s a good debate there. I’d love to have it.

But unfortunately this is not about child pornography. It’s about the Justice Department’s stated desire to ban all pornography, starting from the proposition that obscenity is not protected under the First Amendment. As though that would eliminate sexual abuse, or even reduce it. As though such things are unknown in Iran, or the Saudi family’s Arabia. Or the Catholic Church.

The effort to ban porn starts with making people afraid to access it. I think that’s why the Justice Department demanded the search records. Are your kinks in there? Better turn off the machine.

In the end I think the kinks of others – those sponsoring the Justice Department crackdown – are far more troubling. Instead of shining the light on the individual kinks of individual priests or preachers or prosecutors, which is its own form of sexual entertainment, it’s time we shed light on the joy so many get in controlling the sexual thoughts of others through intimidation.

Sadism is a lot more threatening to your health than an overdose of beaver shots.