TA-OP said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

Every single bill that tries to prevent degeneracy is challenged by the left in this country.

Especially degeneracy with regards to children.

'We just want to have sex with your children, what is the big deal ?'

-signed libs everywhere.

---

I must have missed that petition.

---

• However, perhaps the most distressing result was that 55% of Democrats were not hostile to the term "minor-attracted persons" defined in the study as "individuals attracted to people who are minors or below the legal age of consent." Pedophilia was once "unthinkable" and "radical," but it now finds itself within the realm of "sensible" and "popular" due to the shifting nature of the Overton Window.

TA-OP said:

---

Went and read the original study the article references. It's funny how the article specifically ignores the study saying of all the politically charged terms, Dems disliked "minor-attracted persons" the most while Reps favored it the most compared to the other terms.

---

nai06 said:

---

That "study" (an online survey by preply) had 15% of its respondents as Republicans. I bet it's super accurate.

---

Hungry Ojos said:

---

Pornography is so freaking destructive. To literally everyone involved. I'm not saying it should be banned, but man I wish people could understand what pornography is doing to them.

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

I think there should be an age restriction for all social media, porn, youtube, etc... for minors.


There is an epidemic of recent generations not having normal boy/girl relationships.

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Ozzy Osbourne said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Ozzy Osbourne said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Ozzy Osbourne said:

---

Why is consent all that matters? Do you think dueling should be legalized? What about cannibalism?

---

So now SEX is compared to killing?

Interesting take.

Sharia sure has some funny rules.

---

Ok so you admit your goal is sexual license, not really freedom or principles.

---

You mean...freedom?

Sorry people having sex makes you want to toss them in jail...

Does having sex not in the missionary position draw the death penalty in your utopia?

If people want to **** and other people want to watch, why should that be prohibited?

---

There is no freedom to do things that are immoral. Your moral code is "consent", which, as you seem to agree, is an impoverished morality.

If you don't think smut and children accessing it is immoral, then just say so. Stop trying to use freedom as an excuse for your degeneracy.

---

I think your posting is immoral.

Therefore you MUST stop.

I only grant the freedom to post to posters that meet MY criteria for morality.

And again...I SPECIFICALLY SAID NOT FOR KIDS. JFC. Totalitarian AND poor reading comprehension...

---

Why do kids matter? Is this some sort of antiquated belief system that you're forcing on others? As I've said, parents exercise all sorts of agency over their children.

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

RebelE Infantry said:

---

Wanting to restrict access to porn for minors is now "nanny state."

It is so incredibly over for whatever passes for conservatism these days. Very sad.

---

It's already against the law.

Can we restrict guns purchases in the same manner? Age verification with ID that has to be stored n a database. You know, for the children.

---

Show where porn is in the second amendment.

---

First amendment.

---

You find that one in the penumbras? Because obscenity has never been protected speech.

---

And the supreme court has drawn a line between porn and obscenity. It considers the former protected speech.

---

The Supreme Court also wrongly considered abortion to be a protected right based on laughable contortions of the law. Hence my comment about the penumbras.

There is no right to porn. Any argument otherwise is just silly. There is especially no right to anonymous porn.

---

Just because you say that doesn't make it true.

Currently, there is a right to porn and it's protected by the 1st amendment.

---

There is no right to own slaves yet at one time the law pretended to make it so. Discuss

---

Why would there not be a right to porn?

I'm not talking watching on the bus or showing it to kids in school...

---

You do not have a right to evil, and some things are intrinsically evil. For an off the wall comparison, it's why you can't have sex with your horse even though it is your property.

Porn is intrinsically evil and leads to societal contagion.

---

People can't engage in consensual behavior with others?

I guess you don't believe in the US Constitution or freedom and liberty...

As to the horse thing (JFC that's a dumb example), I can't believe that I have to explain that the horse can't give consent. <- THERE is a sentence I'd never thought I'd ever read, let alone type..

---

If a horse or a child can give consent, it would still be wrong to have sex with them. We let parents consent for their children all the time, it would be wrong for a parent to let their child have sex with someone.

Some things are intrinsically wrong. I know that we live in a moral vacuum where it's taboo to claim things like right and wrong still exist, but they still exist.

The people who wrote the constitution and myself have much different ideas of liberty than the modern libertine. There is no such thing as the freedom to do evil, that is vice and that is license. The idea was that man should not be prevented to achieving his efficient cause; which was union with God. To achieve union with God, the creator endowed man with certain rights that enabled him on his path. This is why the founding fathers and others of that time frame had a much harsher view of state enforced morality than I do.

---

WTF is it with you people and horse ****ing???

Again...this is NOT about kids or horses (seriously???). They can't give consent. If someone is showing them porn then that person needs to be stopped and punished.

As to "intrinsically wrong", in the USSR, RELIGION was in that bucket. Want to open THAT Pandora's Box where you get THAT banned because YOU don't get to force your beliefs on others and they get to force theirs on YOU?

I guess you don't believe in liberty and freedom...just the ones you deign to allow others to have.

---

Again. HORSES get ridden without consent constantly. Children are made to do chores and grounded by their parents constantly. Cows get eaten constantly.

Why are you drawing lines when you refuse to admit the concept of lines even exist?

---

Kvetch said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Horses do give consent to be ridden. Ever tried to ride an unbroken horse?

---

This may be the dumbest comment I've ever read. By that logic, slaves agreed to slavery because they completed the labor instead of being punished.

The fact that you're elevating horses to a level that is required for rational consent to exist says a lot about how serious your views of consent are.

---

Dimebag Darrell said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

RebelE Infantry said:

---

Wanting to restrict access to porn for minors is now "nanny state."

It is so incredibly over for whatever passes for conservatism these days. Very sad.

---

It's already against the law.

Can we restrict guns purchases in the same manner? Age verification with ID that has to be stored n a database. You know, for the children.

---

Show where porn is in the second amendment.

---

First amendment.

---

You find that one in the penumbras? Because obscenity has never been protected speech.

---

And the supreme court has drawn a line between porn and obscenity. It considers the former protected speech.

---

The Supreme Court also wrongly considered abortion to be a protected right based on laughable contortions of the law. Hence my comment about the penumbras.

There is no right to porn. Any argument otherwise is just silly. There is especially no right to anonymous porn.

---

Just because you say that doesn't make it true.

Currently, there is a right to porn and it's protected by the 1st amendment.

---

There is no right to own slaves yet at one time the law pretended to make it so. Discuss

---

Why would there not be a right to porn?

I'm not talking watching on the bus or showing it to kids in school...

---

You do not have a right to evil, and some things are intrinsically evil. For an off the wall comparison, it's why you can't have sex with your horse even though it is your property.

Porn is intrinsically evil and leads to societal contagion.

---

People can't engage in consensual behavior with others?

I guess you don't believe in the US Constitution or freedom and liberty...

As to the horse thing (JFC that's a dumb example), I can't believe that I have to explain that the horse can't give consent. <- THERE is a sentence I'd never thought I'd ever read, let alone type..

---

Yet we can own them, whip them, ride them, use them in experiments, and race them for money and entertainment until their legs break and we have to shoot 'em in the head. All against their will.

Consent isn't a valid reason. It's outlawed because it is disgusting, degenerate, unnatural and vile beyond comprehension.

---

Buck Turgidson said:

---

Please STFU about horses. You guys are killing this thread with an stupid argument that is now on an endless loop.

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

No discussion of the equine sexuality is complete without understanding what sort of gender affirming care these horses are receiving.

---

A gelding is a castrated horse.

---

But is it female or male?

---

Logos Stick said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

I think there should be an age restriction for all social media, porn, youtube, etc... for minors.


There is an epidemic of recent generations not having normal boy/girl relationships.

---

Yet you advocate for minors to change their gender via surgery.

Good gosh

---

B-1 83 said:

---

This thread delivers! It went from whether adults can anonymously watch porn to sex with horses.

---

gbaby23 said:

---

Ban pornography at the federal level.

---

AgRyan04 said:

---

Andrew Dufresne said:

---

Bottom Line: It's too easy for some children to access porn via the Internet.

---

This is 100% correct.

This thread went off the rails when someone started talking about full federal ban for all. That's a completely different conversation.

---

Steampunk-Kangaroo said:

---

AgRyan04 said:

---

Andrew Dufresne said:

---

Bottom Line: It's too easy for some children to access porn via the Internet.

---

This is 100% correct.

This thread went off the rails when someone started talking about full federal ban for all. That's a completely different conversation.

---

You're right, I'm sorry for contributing to that.

It is too easy for them to access porn, but personally I feel that ID verification is the wrong way to go about it. You shouldn't put adults at risk of identity theft and doxxing.

---

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Ag with kids said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

RebelE Infantry said:

---

Wanting to restrict access to porn for minors is now "nanny state."

It is so incredibly over for whatever passes for conservatism these days. Very sad.

---

It's already against the law.

Can we restrict guns purchases in the same manner? Age verification with ID that has to be stored n a database. You know, for the children.

---

Show where porn is in the second amendment.

---

First amendment.

---

You find that one in the penumbras? Because obscenity has never been protected speech.

---

And the supreme court has drawn a line between porn and obscenity. It considers the former protected speech.

---

The Supreme Court also wrongly considered abortion to be a protected right based on laughable contortions of the law. Hence my comment about the penumbras.

There is no right to porn. Any argument otherwise is just silly. There is especially no right to anonymous porn.

---

Just because you say that doesn't make it true.

Currently, there is a right to porn and it's protected by the 1st amendment.

---

There is no right to own slaves yet at one time the law pretended to make it so. Discuss

---

Why would there not be a right to porn?

I'm not talking watching on the bus or showing it to kids in school...

---

You do not have a right to evil, and some things are intrinsically evil. For an off the wall comparison, it's why you can't have sex with your horse even though it is your property.

Porn is intrinsically evil and leads to societal contagion.

---

People can't engage in consensual behavior with others?

I guess you don't believe in the US Constitution or freedom and liberty...

As to the horse thing (JFC that's a dumb example), I can't believe that I have to explain that the horse can't give consent. <- THERE is a sentence I'd never thought I'd ever read, let alone type..

---

JerryHelper said:

---

gbaby23 said:

---

Ban pornography at the federal level.

---

A real conservative here

---

Steampunk-Kangaroo said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

Kvetch said:

---

boboguitar said:

---

RebelE Infantry said:

---

Wanting to restrict access to porn for minors is now "nanny state."

It is so incredibly over for whatever passes for conservatism these days. Very sad.

---

It's already against the law.

Can we restrict guns purchases in the same manner? Age verification with ID that has to be stored n a database. You know, for the children.

---

Show where porn is in the second amendment.

---

First amendment.

---

You find that one in the penumbras? Because obscenity has never been protected speech.

---

And the supreme court has drawn a line between porn and obscenity. It considers the former protected speech.

---

The Supreme Court also wrongly considered abortion to be a protected right based on laughable contortions of the law. Hence my comment about the penumbras.

There is no right to porn. Any argument otherwise is just silly. There is especially no right to anonymous porn.

---

Just because you say that doesn't make it true.

Currently, there is a right to porn and it's protected by the 1st amendment.

---

There is no right to own slaves yet at one time the law pretended to make it so. Discuss

---

Why would there not be a right to porn?

I'm not talking watching on the bus or showing it to kids in school...

---

You do not have a right to evil, and some things are intrinsically evil. For an off the wall comparison, it's why you can't have sex with your horse even though it is your property.

Porn is intrinsically evil and leads to societal contagion.

---

People can't engage in consensual behavior with others?

I guess you don't believe in the US Constitution or freedom and liberty...

As to the horse thing (JFC that's a dumb example), I can't believe that I have to explain that the horse can't give consent. <- THERE is a sentence I'd never thought I'd ever read, let alone type..

---

Exactly, this argument is stupid. Consensual sex with humans, or media depicting that act, is NOT equivalent to bestiality or media depicting that act. If you don't understand the difference then that's above my pay grade and I can't help you there

---

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.

---

Steampunk-Kangaroo said:

---

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.

---

Muslim countries have the exact same view on sex and pornography. They LOVE obscenity and sodomy laws. So do I. They are right about that.

Next you're gonna tell me I need to start wearing a burka. The bible is clear that God gave woman hair as her covering so no as long as you dress modestly a burka wont be necessary. That being said, it sure would be more Godly than the women walking around half necked like they do these days. But no, full burka is not my preference. Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

You also didn't make an argument at all. You simply stated you didn't like it. Ok, noted. Moving on.

---

JerryHelper said:

---

gbaby23 said:

---

Ban pornography at the federal level.

---

A real conservative here

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Steampunk-Kangaroo said:

---

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.

---

Muslim countries have the exact same view on sex and pornography. They LOVE obscenity and sodomy laws. So do I. They are right about that.

Next you're gonna tell me I need to start wearing a burka. The bible is clear that God gave woman hair as her covering so no as long as you dress modestly a burka wont be necessary. That being said, it sure would be more Godly than the women walking around half necked like they do these days. But no, full burka is not my preference. Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

You also didn't make an argument at all. You simply stated you didn't like it. Ok, noted. Moving on.

---

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Steampunk-Kangaroo said:

---

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.

---

Muslim countries have the exact same view on sex and pornography. They LOVE obscenity and sodomy laws. So do I. They are right about that.

Next you're gonna tell me I need to start wearing a burka. The bible is clear that God gave woman hair as her covering so no as long as you dress modestly a burka wont be necessary. That being said, it sure would be more Godly than the women walking around half necked like they do these days. But no, full burka is not my preference. Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

You also didn't make an argument at all. You simply stated you didn't like it. Ok, noted. Moving on.

---

---

Holy cow


Women should have to be covered and as long as they have long hair, they don't need a burka?

I hope you don't have a daughter.

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Steampunk-Kangaroo said:

---

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.

---

Muslim countries have the exact same view on sex and pornography. They LOVE obscenity and sodomy laws. So do I. They are right about that.

Next you're gonna tell me I need to start wearing a burka. The bible is clear that God gave woman hair as her covering so no as long as you dress modestly a burka wont be necessary. That being said, it sure would be more Godly than the women walking around half necked like they do these days. But no, full burka is not my preference. Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

You also didn't make an argument at all. You simply stated you didn't like it. Ok, noted. Moving on.

---

---

Holy cow


Women should have to be covered and as long as they have long hair, they don't need a burka?

I hope you don't have a daughter.

---

Not what I said, but ok.

That sure was a very rude, and very nasty thing to say. You should apologize. I'm a very loving and supportive father who dotes on my daughters. I have two, and Lord willing they will be more well adjusted, and Godly than you.

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Steampunk-Kangaroo said:

---

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.

---

Muslim countries have the exact same view on sex and pornography. They LOVE obscenity and sodomy laws. So do I. They are right about that.

Next you're gonna tell me I need to start wearing a burka. The bible is clear that God gave woman hair as her covering so no as long as you dress modestly a burka wont be necessary. That being said, it sure would be more Godly than the women walking around half necked like they do these days. But no, full burka is not my preference. Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

You also didn't make an argument at all. You simply stated you didn't like it. Ok, noted. Moving on.

---

---

Holy cow


Women should have to be covered and as long as they have long hair, they don't need a burka?

I hope you don't have a daughter.

---

Not what I said, but ok.

That sure was a very rude, and very nasty thing to say. You should apologize. I'm a very loving and supportive father who dotes on my daughters. I have two, and Lord willing they will be more well adjusted, and Godly than you.

---

Bless your heart.


I love how women have to dress modestly rather than men don't act like hound dogs.
You seem to think women are responsible for how men act.


Men are responsible for how they act.

No one else is responsible

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Steampunk-Kangaroo said:

---

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.

---

Muslim countries have the exact same view on sex and pornography. They LOVE obscenity and sodomy laws. So do I. They are right about that.

Next you're gonna tell me I need to start wearing a burka. The bible is clear that God gave woman hair as her covering so no as long as you dress modestly a burka wont be necessary. That being said, it sure would be more Godly than the women walking around half necked like they do these days. But no, full burka is not my preference. Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

You also didn't make an argument at all. You simply stated you didn't like it. Ok, noted. Moving on.

---

---

Holy cow


Women should have to be covered and as long as they have long hair, they don't need a burka?

I hope you don't have a daughter.

---

Not what I said, but ok.

That sure was a very rude, and very nasty thing to say. You should apologize. I'm a very loving and supportive father who dotes on my daughters. I have two, and Lord willing they will be more well adjusted, and Godly than you.

---

Bless your heart.


I love how women have to dress modestly rather than men don't act like hound dogs.
You seem to think women are responsible for how men act.


Men are responsible for how they act.

No one else is responsible

---

Quote:

---

Matthew 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

1 Timothy 2:9 in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation

---

AgRyan04 said:

---

We have full blown hit the wall here between political conservatism and devout religious beliefs

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Steampunk-Kangaroo said:

---

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.

---

Muslim countries have the exact same view on sex and pornography. They LOVE obscenity and sodomy laws. So do I. They are right about that.

Next you're gonna tell me I need to start wearing a burka. The bible is clear that God gave woman hair as her covering so no as long as you dress modestly a burka wont be necessary. That being said, it sure would be more Godly than the women walking around half necked like they do these days. But no, full burka is not my preference. Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

You also didn't make an argument at all. You simply stated you didn't like it. Ok, noted. Moving on.

---

---

Holy cow


Women should have to be covered and as long as they have long hair, they don't need a burka?

I hope you don't have a daughter.

---

Not what I said, but ok.

That sure was a very rude, and very nasty thing to say. You should apologize. I'm a very loving and supportive father who dotes on my daughters. I have two, and Lord willing they will be more well adjusted, and Godly than you.

---

Bless your heart.


I love how women have to dress modestly rather than men don't act like hound dogs.
You seem to think women are responsible for how men act.


Men are responsible for how they act.

No one else is responsible

---

I didn't say that either... Did you have fun beating up that strawman?

The scripture clearly states both things are true. Men are to control their eyes, and are responsible for not lusting.

Quote:

---

Matthew 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

---

Women are also to dress modestly. Not my opinion but God's law. Take it up with Him.

---