Texas HB 1181 (porn website age verification bill) preliminarily enjoined

24,958 Views | 462 Replies | Last: 5 mo ago by HTownAg98
fka ftc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RebelE Infantry said:





So how do you, a rock-ribbed conservative, plan to counter this push by the liberal left? I am not shy in stating my belief that pushing back against this filth is a legitimate use of State power. A belief backed by centuries of precedent that lasted up until roughly 1970. What's your plan? After all, that's what this whole discussion boils down to- to what ends may government power be legitimately wielded and upon what principles is such argument based.
Glad you asked. As mentioned, I have a 13yo son who went through puberty in the 10-11yo time frame and got into some movies on Netflix before we realized he had any interest in the subject matter.

We locked all the devices down but more importantly, we had long, repeated discussions on porn and the unrealistic examples of sexual activity that is the basis of most porn. I think many parents and others would benefit from more open, honest discussion on porn, the issues that surround it, the ills of it, so on and so forth.

My issue with this is requiring a company to "check IDs" and holding them liable if someone thinks little Johnny developed a porn addiction and dropped out of school because PornHub was not robust enough in their ID check.

Further, any increase in data collection on individuals is something I am developing an ever increasing aversion to. It is clear that folks on both sides of the aisle will abuse any power you give them in an effort to retain and increase that power.

Why not instead of putting the onus on the porn sites, require ISPs and technology providers to continue to increase ways and effectiveness of locking down content? I feel pretty savvy about locking things down at my crib, but other parents are woefully naive or uneducated on how to do these things.

Point is, there are other ways to accomplish the goal that does not involve handing the government more power.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RebelE Infantry said:

DannyDuberstein said:

Yes, the vast, vast majority are indeed handling it just fine. The kid diddlers have always been there and should be shot. Porn isn't making them do it.


Are you suggesting that the increase in the public push for the sexualization of children, pornographic books in school libraries, etc is NOT related to the widespread breakdown of traditional sexual ethics and morality to include the propagation of hardcore pornography?
Trying to imply that porn is responsible for people doing bad things is as stupid as saying guns are responsible for people doing bad things.

At some point, you have to look at the PERSON doing the bad things and blame THEM and not try to find a scapegoat to pin it on...
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DannyDuberstein said:

Banning porn won't fix a single societal problem. It will just lead to more wasted time and money. It's like being in 1917 and going "hey guys, i think this prohibition thing is gonna be a cure to our ills"
Worked out great for the mob...
AgRyan04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RebelE Infantry said:


After all, that's what this whole discussion boils down to- to what ends may government power be legitimately wielded and upon what principles is such argument based.


No, the discussion was about limiting access of porn to children.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GeorgiAg said:

gbaby23 said:

Ban pornography at the federal level.



Yes, let's be rash. Pornography can lead to addiction and mental health issues and promote human trafficking.
https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-pornography-public-health-crisis-states.html?_amp=true
“If you’re going to have crime it should at least be organized crime”
-Havelock Vetinari
RebelE Infantry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

fka ftc said:

Dies Irae said:

DannyDuberstein said:

RebelE Infantry said:

DannyDuberstein said:

Like many things, porn is destructive but should be legal.

And these age verification requirements sound like an identity thief's dream


I have yet to see a good reason why this should be so. All I ever see is appeals to some vague notion of "freedom" or "liberty" based on woefully incorrect definitions of the same.


Because the vast majority can handle it just fine. And yes, we do live in a free society where folks should be and are able to do things in private that you may find distasteful while at the same time being none of your business
Do you wanna take a crack at the "horse sex" question, or will that illustrate the limits of your "freedom"
The horse stuff has run its course, so to speak. Move on. No one, including you, understands the point you are making with this odd obsession.
I have zero doubt that the porn-brains on this thread are having trouble understanding the point; but I perfectly understand what I'm saying.

SOME THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM

everyone knows this as evidenced by the fact that we do not give a whim about the consent of animals yet it is still abhorrent to have sex with them, even if they're your property; even if no one knows about it.

The same is true with porn, it is definitionally evil; and a societal cancer whether or not it is being voluntarily taken advantage of.
As long as YOU and YOUR group gets to define WHAT "THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

In the Soviet Union, RELIGION was "INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

But, somehow, I doubt you agree with that.


Congratulations, you have stumbled upon the essential question of societal governance: "Who Decides?"

So who do you think should decide these questions?

Also I bet you thought "different societies and cultures have different value systems" to be a very smart and novel take, didn't you?
The flames of the Imperium burn brightly in the hearts of men repulsed by degenerate modernity. Souls aflame with love of goodness, truth, beauty, justice, and order.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dies Irae said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

Ag with kids said:

RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

fka ftc said:

AGC said:

fka ftc said:

Still not making the connection to HB 1181. I did not read it as promoting porn to children nor causing them to look at it. Maybe you read it differently.

Seems to me like parenting is the mechanism to encourage children not to send and lead them to a path of righteousness. Not allowing for suits to be brought against companies providing legal content to adults, content quite clearly covered under the 1st amendment.


You're thinking about the world as it was 30 years ago as is every, 'be a good parent' person. Porn is not a playboy under your dad's bed anymore. Magazines aren't adductive and easy to carry around like what exists now, nor did porn have nearly the same effect on the brain as instant video and unlimited ease of access.

Age verification with ID is the first step on the only reasonable path. If someone's worried about being anonymous while watching strangers have sex they should ask themselves why. The companies already know who you are, they don't need to dox you nor do they care. If you're afraid of your family, work, or friend finding out that's usually an indication that you shouldn't be doing it.


I have a 13yo son. Appreciate the lecture on how porn works in the modern era.

Age verification is absolutely the lamest, weakest, absolutely ineffective way to limit the access.

Lots of things on the web have age verification and none of it is "effective".

Addiction to porn is VASTLY over dramatized. It's a convenient excuse for young folk and hard up husbands who get caught by the wife looking at dirty picks and choking their chicken. "It's not my fault honey, it's much purn addiction!"


https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/08/30/report-louisianas-age-verification-law-cuts-website-pornhubs-traffic-80/

It's cut traffic by 80% to the most popular porn sites, in Louisiana. That's fairly effective
And...dark web porn has seen an 80% increase in traffic, in Lousiana.


Surely you have proof of this claim.
It's a JOKE. Look at the icon occasionally...

JFC people...


You only joke and feign outrage to get around the fact that you have no counter argument. You have been fed and bought in to a line of platitudes that you accept as tautology with no means to defend them other than "I can't even"
And your tautology is "the Bible SAYS!!!!!!!!!!"


What's weird is that's the tautology for the entirety of Western Civilization.
But not their governments...

Do you think Christianity demands that it be FORCED on others? Kinda like Islam demands that the unbelievers convert or die?
Yes, which is why we had to go back to the Supreme Court to stop mother's from killing their children, because otherwise they wouldn't have done it.
This is to stop killing children. Not forcing Christianity. There are a lot of non-Christians that don't support abortion, fwiw.


In some cultures, like Judaism, it is okay to kill children up to a certain point.

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/26/1107722531/some-jewish-groups-blast-the-end-of-roe-as-a-violation-of-their-religious-belief

They claimed striking down Roe v Wade was an attack upon their religious belief. What sort of basis do we have to reject them?
Oh god...are we starting on Jews now?

This thread is like internet LSD...
crane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
the problem with theocrats is that you take your beliefs as certain facts and argue that everybody else is wrong. Whos to say a Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu isn't right?
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RebelE Infantry said:

fka ftc said:

RebelE Infantry said:

DannyDuberstein said:

Yes, the vast, vast majority are indeed handling it just fine. The kid diddlers have always been there and should be shot. Porn isn't making them do it.


Are you suggesting that the increase in the public push for the sexualization of children, pornographic books in school libraries, etc is NOT related to the widespread breakdown of traditional sexual ethics and morality to include the propagation of hardcore pornography?
The push is by the liberal left along with the weak-kneed republicans and supposed conservatives who fear the left or cling to their cries for decorum and nice tweets.

Porn is not the cause of societal degradation. It may be a symptom, but it is NOT the cause.


So how do you, a rock-ribbed conservative, plan to counter this push by the liberal left? I am not shy in stating my belief that pushing back against this filth is a legitimate use of State power. A belief backed by centuries of precedent that lasted up until roughly 1970. What's your plan? After all, that's what this whole discussion boils down to- to what ends may government power be legitimately wielded and upon what principles is such argument based.
Your view apparently is "for religious totalitarianism".

But, only for YOUR version of religion. The others can go piss off because they don't believe correctly.
fka ftc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

GeorgiAg said:

gbaby23 said:

Ban pornography at the federal level.



Yes, let's be rash. Pornography can lead to addiction and mental health issues and promote human trafficking.
https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-pornography-public-health-crisis-states.html?_amp=true
DemLib policies and the Biden presidency have done 1000 times more harm from addiction and mental health crisis than porn could ever, ever hope to do.

Can we instead focus on eradicating leftist ideals and policies and the people who vote and support them?
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
fka ftc said:

RebelE Infantry said:





So how do you, a rock-ribbed conservative, plan to counter this push by the liberal left? I am not shy in stating my belief that pushing back against this filth is a legitimate use of State power. A belief backed by centuries of precedent that lasted up until roughly 1970. What's your plan? After all, that's what this whole discussion boils down to- to what ends may government power be legitimately wielded and upon what principles is such argument based.
Glad you asked. As mentioned, I have a 13yo son who went through puberty in the 10-11yo time frame and got into some movies on Netflix before we realized he had any interest in the subject matter.

We locked all the devices down but more importantly, we had long, repeated discussions on porn and the unrealistic examples of sexual activity that is the basis of most porn. I think many parents and others would benefit from more open, honest discussion on porn, the issues that surround it, the ills of it, so on and so forth.

My issue with this is requiring a company to "check IDs" and holding them liable if someone thinks little Johnny developed a porn addiction and dropped out of school because PornHub was not robust enough in their ID check.

Further, any increase in data collection on individuals is something I am developing an ever increasing aversion to. It is clear that folks on both sides of the aisle will abuse any power you give them in an effort to retain and increase that power.

Why not instead of putting the onus on the porn sites, require ISPs and technology providers to continue to increase ways and effectiveness of locking down content? I feel pretty savvy about locking things down at my crib, but other parents are woefully naive or uneducated on how to do these things.

Point is, there are other ways to accomplish the goal that does not involve handing the government more power.
Gosh...

You mean that PARENTS should be responsible for protecting their children and not GOVERNMENT?

What a crazy idea!!!
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
UTExan said:

GeorgiAg said:

gbaby23 said:

Ban pornography at the federal level.



Yes, let's be rash. Pornography can lead to addiction and mental health issues and promote human trafficking.
https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-pornography-public-health-crisis-states.html?_amp=true
Now we're listening to the scientologists?
DannyDuberstein
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm always impressed by the religious right's incompetence at attacking the root of issues vs wasting effort on symptoms.
fka ftc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ag with kids said:

UTExan said:




Yes, let's be rash. Pornography can lead to addiction and mental health issues and promote human trafficking.
https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-pornography-public-health-crisis-states.html?_amp=true
Now we're listening to the scientologists?
Not only that, but listening to them on... mental health issues.

If this was about aliens living in volcanos, then invoking the Church of Scientology would be relevant.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

fka ftc said:

Dies Irae said:

DannyDuberstein said:

RebelE Infantry said:

DannyDuberstein said:

Like many things, porn is destructive but should be legal.

And these age verification requirements sound like an identity thief's dream


I have yet to see a good reason why this should be so. All I ever see is appeals to some vague notion of "freedom" or "liberty" based on woefully incorrect definitions of the same.


Because the vast majority can handle it just fine. And yes, we do live in a free society where folks should be and are able to do things in private that you may find distasteful while at the same time being none of your business
Do you wanna take a crack at the "horse sex" question, or will that illustrate the limits of your "freedom"
The horse stuff has run its course, so to speak. Move on. No one, including you, understands the point you are making with this odd obsession.
I have zero doubt that the porn-brains on this thread are having trouble understanding the point; but I perfectly understand what I'm saying.

SOME THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM

everyone knows this as evidenced by the fact that we do not give a whim about the consent of animals yet it is still abhorrent to have sex with them, even if they're your property; even if no one knows about it.

The same is true with porn, it is definitionally evil; and a societal cancer whether or not it is being voluntarily taken advantage of.
As long as YOU and YOUR group gets to define WHAT "THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

In the Soviet Union, RELIGION was "INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

But, somehow, I doubt you agree with that.


Congratulations, you have stumbled upon the essential question of societal governance: "Who Decides?"


So who do you think should decide these questions?

Also I bet you thought "different societies and cultures have different value systems" to be a very smart and novel take, didn't you?
You've chosen totalitarianism...doesn't matter that it's RELIGIOUS in nature.

Congrats.

I'm out on that, though.

I want freedom and liberty.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
fka ftc said:

UTExan said:

GeorgiAg said:

gbaby23 said:

Ban pornography at the federal level.



Yes, let's be rash. Pornography can lead to addiction and mental health issues and promote human trafficking.
https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-pornography-public-health-crisis-states.html?_amp=true
DemLib policies and the Biden presidency have done 1000 times more harm from addiction and mental health crisis than porn could ever, ever hope to do.

Can we instead focus on eradicating leftist ideals and policies and the people who vote and support them?
This!
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
crane said:

the problem with theocrats is that you take your beliefs as certain facts and argue that everybody else is wrong. Whos to say a Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu isn't right?
Haven't you figured it out from this thread already?

THEY get to say it...all others piss off.
RebelE Infantry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ag with kids said:

RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

fka ftc said:

Dies Irae said:

DannyDuberstein said:

RebelE Infantry said:

DannyDuberstein said:

Like many things, porn is destructive but should be legal.

And these age verification requirements sound like an identity thief's dream


I have yet to see a good reason why this should be so. All I ever see is appeals to some vague notion of "freedom" or "liberty" based on woefully incorrect definitions of the same.


Because the vast majority can handle it just fine. And yes, we do live in a free society where folks should be and are able to do things in private that you may find distasteful while at the same time being none of your business
Do you wanna take a crack at the "horse sex" question, or will that illustrate the limits of your "freedom"
The horse stuff has run its course, so to speak. Move on. No one, including you, understands the point you are making with this odd obsession.
I have zero doubt that the porn-brains on this thread are having trouble understanding the point; but I perfectly understand what I'm saying.

SOME THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM

everyone knows this as evidenced by the fact that we do not give a whim about the consent of animals yet it is still abhorrent to have sex with them, even if they're your property; even if no one knows about it.

The same is true with porn, it is definitionally evil; and a societal cancer whether or not it is being voluntarily taken advantage of.
As long as YOU and YOUR group gets to define WHAT "THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

In the Soviet Union, RELIGION was "INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

But, somehow, I doubt you agree with that.


Congratulations, you have stumbled upon the essential question of societal governance: "Who Decides?"


So who do you think should decide these questions?

Also I bet you thought "different societies and cultures have different value systems" to be a very smart and novel take, didn't you?
You've chosen totalitarianism...doesn't matter that it's RELIGIOUS in nature.

Congrats.

I'm out on that, though.

I want freedom and liberty.


This doesn't answer the question of "who decides?" Unless you're of the opinion that no one can decide and that somehow leads to a functioning society.

On the question of liberty and freedom- I agree with Bl Gabriel Garcia Moreno, president of Ecuador:

"Liberty for everyone and everything, except for evil and evil-doers."
The flames of the Imperium burn brightly in the hearts of men repulsed by degenerate modernity. Souls aflame with love of goodness, truth, beauty, justice, and order.
crane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You can't just dictate who has a voice and who doesn't. We don't live in a theocracy or ever will
fka ftc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

fka ftc said:

Dies Irae said:

DannyDuberstein said:

RebelE Infantry said:

DannyDuberstein said:

Like many things, porn is destructive but should be legal.

And these age verification requirements sound like an identity thief's dream


I have yet to see a good reason why this should be so. All I ever see is appeals to some vague notion of "freedom" or "liberty" based on woefully incorrect definitions of the same.


Because the vast majority can handle it just fine. And yes, we do live in a free society where folks should be and are able to do things in private that you may find distasteful while at the same time being none of your business
Do you wanna take a crack at the "horse sex" question, or will that illustrate the limits of your "freedom"
The horse stuff has run its course, so to speak. Move on. No one, including you, understands the point you are making with this odd obsession.
I have zero doubt that the porn-brains on this thread are having trouble understanding the point; but I perfectly understand what I'm saying.

SOME THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM

everyone knows this as evidenced by the fact that we do not give a whim about the consent of animals yet it is still abhorrent to have sex with them, even if they're your property; even if no one knows about it.

The same is true with porn, it is definitionally evil; and a societal cancer whether or not it is being voluntarily taken advantage of.
As long as YOU and YOUR group gets to define WHAT "THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

In the Soviet Union, RELIGION was "INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

But, somehow, I doubt you agree with that.


Congratulations, you have stumbled upon the essential question of societal governance: "Who Decides?"


So who do you think should decide these questions?

Also I bet you thought "different societies and cultures have different value systems" to be a very smart and novel take, didn't you?
You've chosen totalitarianism...doesn't matter that it's RELIGIOUS in nature.

Congrats.

I'm out on that, though.

I want freedom and liberty.


This doesn't answer the question of "who decides?" Unless you're of the opinion that no one can decide and that somehow leads to a functioning society.

On the question of liberty and freedom- I agree with Bl Gabriel Garcia Moreno, president of Ecuador:

"Liberty for everyone and everything, except for evil and evil-doers."


We currently live in a Country where the leader and the party in power believe evil is comprised of freedom, capitalism, religion and love of Country and the evil doers are folks formerly known as patriots.

So you sure you are good with Moreno? Because right now our Moreno is named Biden.
RebelE Infantry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
fka ftc said:

RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

fka ftc said:

Dies Irae said:

DannyDuberstein said:

RebelE Infantry said:

DannyDuberstein said:

Like many things, porn is destructive but should be legal.

And these age verification requirements sound like an identity thief's dream


I have yet to see a good reason why this should be so. All I ever see is appeals to some vague notion of "freedom" or "liberty" based on woefully incorrect definitions of the same.


Because the vast majority can handle it just fine. And yes, we do live in a free society where folks should be and are able to do things in private that you may find distasteful while at the same time being none of your business
Do you wanna take a crack at the "horse sex" question, or will that illustrate the limits of your "freedom"
The horse stuff has run its course, so to speak. Move on. No one, including you, understands the point you are making with this odd obsession.
I have zero doubt that the porn-brains on this thread are having trouble understanding the point; but I perfectly understand what I'm saying.

SOME THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM

everyone knows this as evidenced by the fact that we do not give a whim about the consent of animals yet it is still abhorrent to have sex with them, even if they're your property; even if no one knows about it.

The same is true with porn, it is definitionally evil; and a societal cancer whether or not it is being voluntarily taken advantage of.
As long as YOU and YOUR group gets to define WHAT "THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

In the Soviet Union, RELIGION was "INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

But, somehow, I doubt you agree with that.


Congratulations, you have stumbled upon the essential question of societal governance: "Who Decides?"


So who do you think should decide these questions?

Also I bet you thought "different societies and cultures have different value systems" to be a very smart and novel take, didn't you?
You've chosen totalitarianism...doesn't matter that it's RELIGIOUS in nature.

Congrats.

I'm out on that, though.

I want freedom and liberty.


This doesn't answer the question of "who decides?" Unless you're of the opinion that no one can decide and that somehow leads to a functioning society.

On the question of liberty and freedom- I agree with Bl Gabriel Garcia Moreno, president of Ecuador:

"Liberty for everyone and everything, except for evil and evil-doers."


We currently live in a Country where the leader and the party in power believe evil is comprised of freedom, capitalism, religion and love of Country and the evil doers are folks formerly known as patriots.

So you sure you are good with Moreno? Because right now our Moreno is named Biden.


Do you believe the concepts of "good", "evil", and "truth" are objective?
The flames of the Imperium burn brightly in the hearts of men repulsed by degenerate modernity. Souls aflame with love of goodness, truth, beauty, justice, and order.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

fka ftc said:

Dies Irae said:

DannyDuberstein said:

RebelE Infantry said:

DannyDuberstein said:

Like many things, porn is destructive but should be legal.

And these age verification requirements sound like an identity thief's dream


I have yet to see a good reason why this should be so. All I ever see is appeals to some vague notion of "freedom" or "liberty" based on woefully incorrect definitions of the same.


Because the vast majority can handle it just fine. And yes, we do live in a free society where folks should be and are able to do things in private that you may find distasteful while at the same time being none of your business
Do you wanna take a crack at the "horse sex" question, or will that illustrate the limits of your "freedom"
The horse stuff has run its course, so to speak. Move on. No one, including you, understands the point you are making with this odd obsession.
I have zero doubt that the porn-brains on this thread are having trouble understanding the point; but I perfectly understand what I'm saying.

SOME THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM

everyone knows this as evidenced by the fact that we do not give a whim about the consent of animals yet it is still abhorrent to have sex with them, even if they're your property; even if no one knows about it.

The same is true with porn, it is definitionally evil; and a societal cancer whether or not it is being voluntarily taken advantage of.
As long as YOU and YOUR group gets to define WHAT "THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

In the Soviet Union, RELIGION was "INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

But, somehow, I doubt you agree with that.


Congratulations, you have stumbled upon the essential question of societal governance: "Who Decides?"


So who do you think should decide these questions?

Also I bet you thought "different societies and cultures have different value systems" to be a very smart and novel take, didn't you?
You've chosen totalitarianism...doesn't matter that it's RELIGIOUS in nature.

Congrats.

I'm out on that, though.

I want freedom and liberty.


This doesn't answer the question of "who decides?" Unless you're of the opinion that no one can decide and that somehow leads to a functioning society.

On the question of liberty and freedom- I agree with Bl Gabriel Garcia Moreno, president of Ecuador:

"Liberty for everyone and everything, except for evil and evil-doers."
I answered that RIGHT HERE...

I'm sure you want to be in the group deciding what is and isn't evil. I would assume you would hate it if another group, perhaps Muslims, gets to be the ones deciding and they decide something like not converting to Islam is evil.

I want liberty - to be free of oppressive restrictions imposed by others.

In reality, evil has to do with things that damage others against their will...


Burdizzo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
UTExan said:

GeorgiAg said:

gbaby23 said:

Ban pornography at the federal level.



Yes, let's be rash. Pornography can lead to addiction and mental health issues and promote human trafficking.
https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-pornography-public-health-crisis-states.html?_amp=true



Does porn create addiction/ mental health issues or does it just expose predisposition to them? Addiction comes in all forms
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RebelE Infantry said:

fka ftc said:

RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

fka ftc said:

Dies Irae said:

DannyDuberstein said:

RebelE Infantry said:

DannyDuberstein said:

Like many things, porn is destructive but should be legal.

And these age verification requirements sound like an identity thief's dream


I have yet to see a good reason why this should be so. All I ever see is appeals to some vague notion of "freedom" or "liberty" based on woefully incorrect definitions of the same.


Because the vast majority can handle it just fine. And yes, we do live in a free society where folks should be and are able to do things in private that you may find distasteful while at the same time being none of your business
Do you wanna take a crack at the "horse sex" question, or will that illustrate the limits of your "freedom"
The horse stuff has run its course, so to speak. Move on. No one, including you, understands the point you are making with this odd obsession.
I have zero doubt that the porn-brains on this thread are having trouble understanding the point; but I perfectly understand what I'm saying.

SOME THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM

everyone knows this as evidenced by the fact that we do not give a whim about the consent of animals yet it is still abhorrent to have sex with them, even if they're your property; even if no one knows about it.

The same is true with porn, it is definitionally evil; and a societal cancer whether or not it is being voluntarily taken advantage of.
As long as YOU and YOUR group gets to define WHAT "THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

In the Soviet Union, RELIGION was "INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

But, somehow, I doubt you agree with that.


Congratulations, you have stumbled upon the essential question of societal governance: "Who Decides?"


So who do you think should decide these questions?

Also I bet you thought "different societies and cultures have different value systems" to be a very smart and novel take, didn't you?
You've chosen totalitarianism...doesn't matter that it's RELIGIOUS in nature.

Congrats.

I'm out on that, though.

I want freedom and liberty.


This doesn't answer the question of "who decides?" Unless you're of the opinion that no one can decide and that somehow leads to a functioning society.

On the question of liberty and freedom- I agree with Bl Gabriel Garcia Moreno, president of Ecuador:

"Liberty for everyone and everything, except for evil and evil-doers."


We currently live in a Country where the leader and the party in power believe evil is comprised of freedom, capitalism, religion and love of Country and the evil doers are folks formerly known as patriots.

So you sure you are good with Moreno? Because right now our Moreno is named Biden.


Do you believe the concepts of "good", "evil", and "truth" are objective?
They can be in some cases. Killing someone that doesn't "need killing" could objectively be viewed as evil. However, killing someone who DOES "need killing" is more subjective.

Murder of an innocent person vs execution of the murderer, for example.

If you force me to convert to your religious beliefs, that might be considered evil.
fka ftc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
They are most certainly not objective.
Faustus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TxAgPreacher said:

exp said:

Conservatives love freedom until they have a chance to Lord morally superior central planning onto others.
Yes. Because we actually want to conserve our culture, and prevent rampant degeneracy.

Freedom from sin, not freedom to sin.

"The truth shall set you free"

God's perfect law if liberty is what sets you free. Not being a slave to sin. You are either set free in Christ, or a slave to your lusts.

It's the Christian worldview. Our founders knew this and were ok with obscenity laws, sodomy laws, and the like. I think they understood freedom better than you.
[Hopes person responding isn't black.]




Edit: I don't normally gild the lily on low-hanging fruit beyond the initial rejoinder, but seriously how do you make multiple slavery references, cite to the Christian worldview, and then cite to the Founders understanding freedom better than present day folk? I'm still bemused, but pleasantly so as a CM.

No, they didn't understand freedom better than us. They just had a regime that better fit the demographics and zeitgeist of most of the board, and crafted a document that they didn't realize was going to be amended and used to afford protections far beyond those for whom they originally intended it for (landed, white males).
Dies Irae
How long do you want to ignore this user?
crane said:

So the Greeks and Romans who set the standard were now devout evangelicals?


Do I strike you as an evangelical?
Dies Irae
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ag with kids said:

fka ftc said:

RebelE Infantry said:





So how do you, a rock-ribbed conservative, plan to counter this push by the liberal left? I am not shy in stating my belief that pushing back against this filth is a legitimate use of State power. A belief backed by centuries of precedent that lasted up until roughly 1970. What's your plan? After all, that's what this whole discussion boils down to- to what ends may government power be legitimately wielded and upon what principles is such argument based.
Glad you asked. As mentioned, I have a 13yo son who went through puberty in the 10-11yo time frame and got into some movies on Netflix before we realized he had any interest in the subject matter.

We locked all the devices down but more importantly, we had long, repeated discussions on porn and the unrealistic examples of sexual activity that is the basis of most porn. I think many parents and others would benefit from more open, honest discussion on porn, the issues that surround it, the ills of it, so on and so forth.

My issue with this is requiring a company to "check IDs" and holding them liable if someone thinks little Johnny developed a porn addiction and dropped out of school because PornHub was not robust enough in their ID check.

Further, any increase in data collection on individuals is something I am developing an ever increasing aversion to. It is clear that folks on both sides of the aisle will abuse any power you give them in an effort to retain and increase that power.

Why not instead of putting the onus on the porn sites, require ISPs and technology providers to continue to increase ways and effectiveness of locking down content? I feel pretty savvy about locking things down at my crib, but other parents are woefully naive or uneducated on how to do these things.

Point is, there are other ways to accomplish the goal that does not involve handing the government more power.
Gosh...

You mean that PARENTS should be responsible for protecting their children and not GOVERNMENT?

What a crazy idea!!!


What about when parents don't?
Dies Irae
How long do you want to ignore this user?
crane said:

You can't just dictate who has a voice and who doesn't. We don't live in a theocracy or ever will


We can literally do this. That's why we don't let felons or children vote
crane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dies Irae said:

crane said:

You can't just dictate who has a voice and who doesn't. We don't live in a theocracy or ever will


We can literally do this. That's why we don't let felons or children vote
so you're saying only these deemed worthy should have a voice? Who would your target demographic be that gets a voice?
Dies Irae
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ag with kids said:

RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

RebelE Infantry said:

Ag with kids said:

Dies Irae said:

fka ftc said:

Dies Irae said:

DannyDuberstein said:

RebelE Infantry said:

DannyDuberstein said:

Like many things, porn is destructive but should be legal.

And these age verification requirements sound like an identity thief's dream


I have yet to see a good reason why this should be so. All I ever see is appeals to some vague notion of "freedom" or "liberty" based on woefully incorrect definitions of the same.


Because the vast majority can handle it just fine. And yes, we do live in a free society where folks should be and are able to do things in private that you may find distasteful while at the same time being none of your business
Do you wanna take a crack at the "horse sex" question, or will that illustrate the limits of your "freedom"
The horse stuff has run its course, so to speak. Move on. No one, including you, understands the point you are making with this odd obsession.
I have zero doubt that the porn-brains on this thread are having trouble understanding the point; but I perfectly understand what I'm saying.

SOME THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM

everyone knows this as evidenced by the fact that we do not give a whim about the consent of animals yet it is still abhorrent to have sex with them, even if they're your property; even if no one knows about it.

The same is true with porn, it is definitionally evil; and a societal cancer whether or not it is being voluntarily taken advantage of.
As long as YOU and YOUR group gets to define WHAT "THINGS ARE INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

In the Soviet Union, RELIGION was "INTRINSICALLY WRONG OUTSIDE OF IDEAS OF CONSENT OR VOLUNTARISM".

But, somehow, I doubt you agree with that.


Congratulations, you have stumbled upon the essential question of societal governance: "Who Decides?"


So who do you think should decide these questions?

Also I bet you thought "different societies and cultures have different value systems" to be a very smart and novel take, didn't you?
You've chosen totalitarianism...doesn't matter that it's RELIGIOUS in nature.

Congrats.

I'm out on that, though.

I want freedom and liberty.


This doesn't answer the question of "who decides?" Unless you're of the opinion that no one can decide and that somehow leads to a functioning society.

On the question of liberty and freedom- I agree with Bl Gabriel Garcia Moreno, president of Ecuador:

"Liberty for everyone and everything, except for evil and evil-doers."
I answered that RIGHT HERE...

I'm sure you want to be in the group deciding what is and isn't evil. I would assume you would hate it if another group, perhaps Muslims, gets to be the ones deciding and they decide something like not converting to Islam is evil.

I want liberty - to be free of oppressive restrictions imposed by others.

In reality, evil has to do with things that damage others against their will...





Who determines what is oppressive and what isn't? You're just kicking the can down the road. Hence the horse sex analogy. Why has society determined that you can ride a horse but not have sex with one? Because some things are good and some are bad.

You want to play both sides against the middle. Nothing is good or bad, except for the few things that are.
Dies Irae
How long do you want to ignore this user?
crane said:

Dies Irae said:

crane said:

You can't just dictate who has a voice and who doesn't. We don't live in a theocracy or ever will


We can literally do this. That's why we don't let felons or children vote
so you're saying only these deemed worthy should have a voice? Who would your target demographic be that gets a voice?


Yes only those deemed worthy should have a voice. Our founding fathers thought only white men of character should be able to vote. I'm far more liberal than they are
Tanya 93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Who had cow ****ing on the F16 Bingo card?

I just need a certain poster to be called mfbarnes and then I get to scream bingo!
AGC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ag with kids said:

AGC said:

fka ftc said:

AGC said:

fka ftc said:

Still not making the connection to HB 1181. I did not read it as promoting porn to children nor causing them to look at it. Maybe you read it differently.

Seems to me like parenting is the mechanism to encourage children not to send and lead them to a path of righteousness. Not allowing for suits to be brought against companies providing legal content to adults, content quite clearly covered under the 1st amendment.


You're thinking about the world as it was 30 years ago as is every, 'be a good parent' person. Porn is not a playboy under your dad's bed anymore. Magazines aren't adductive and easy to carry around like what exists now, nor did porn have nearly the same effect on the brain as instant video and unlimited ease of access.

Age verification with ID is the first step on the only reasonable path. If someone's worried about being anonymous while watching strangers have sex they should ask themselves why. The companies already know who you are, they don't need to dox you nor do they care. If you're afraid of your family, work, or friend finding out that's usually an indication that you shouldn't be doing it.


I have a 13yo son. Appreciate the lecture on how porn works in the modern era.

Age verification is absolutely the lamest, weakest, absolutely ineffective way to limit the access.

Lots of things on the web have age verification and none of it is "effective".

Addiction to porn is VASTLY over dramatized. It's a convenient excuse for young folk and hard up husbands who get caught by the wife looking at dirty picks and choking their chicken. "It's not my fault honey, it's much purn addiction!"


Age verification is operating in an outdated paradigm: we all agree on that. Hence the bill that you're actively against since it's reasonable (government required ID) without being intrusive (all the porn sites know who you are anyways as do their marketers). So why is it such a big deal? Sure, kids can use their parents but that's no different than stealing a credit card or using a fake ID like 30 years ago. The law isn't to prevent any and all access. At least present a reasonable argument aside from, 'any regulation is bad.' Might as well pretend that modern day fentanyl is the same as marijuana when you were in high school.

The research is pretty clear. Porn use is like drug use in how it affects your brain. Impedes long term decision making and increases risk taking as it rewires it. It'd be nice if you pro-porn people would just be honest and say you want easy ubiquitous access. That's all the group fighting it is really working for. There's no credit card involved here since you're the product for these sites anyways.
It is not clear. What major organizations define porn use as an addiction? Or are they all liberal (oh sorry, "conservative" according to DI if I'm using his newly defined pronouns correctly)...


No, it's quite clear. We have brain scans that prove the long term effects - there's no functional difference between the brain of a habitual porn user and heroin user. That's why it's hard to take you and fka seriously - the science doesn't actually support your beliefs. You're thinking is outdated and outmoded.

Dunno why y'all think unhindered access to watch other people have sex is a 'good' thing though. Y'all seem to not actually be able to defend that. Some vague notion of freedom and liberty isn't justification for it - it offers no tangible good for any participant or observer.
fka ftc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Going to need a citation that long term porn addiction has same effect as long term heroin user.

Though I admit bother can result in traumatic vein damage due to repeated beatings / abuse.

But really, I would like to see the article / study being referenced.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.