fka ftc said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Would you want your kid to do porn? Then why would you want anyone to?

---

Poor form to bring someone's kid into it.

---

She literally told him she felt sorry for his daughters, first. But you don't want to hear that.

---

Same comment applies. So I do not need to hear it.

Seems like some though may need to thump less on their good books and understand others have different views and are not deserving of being cast to eternal damnation on a POLITICS board, when there is a holier than thou forum for such discussion.s

---

Just odd you would bristle at "would you like your kids to do porn" and not "I feel sorry for your daughters"

---

Seems odd I answered you but you want to keep harping.

Quote:

---

Same comment applies. So I do not need to hear it.

---

---

It might apply, but only one got you to say something. Please educate Tanya of her poor form.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You're so noble! So much better than us.

Who are we to judge the rapist!?

---

Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7 would seem to offer insight.

---

It says judge righteous judgment. First take the plank out, THEN take the spec out.

Certainly I have my sins. That does not preclude me from calling a spade a spade.

Rape is bad. Porn is bad. I judge them to be wrong things. I do not condemn. Only God does. I'm just telling you what He said.

---

Let us know which chapter and verse covers the subject of Texas HB 1181.

---

There are many on these subjects. You know that. Stop pretending not to.

---

I must have been absent the Sunday they went into the legalities of civil penalties for companies not showing adequate documentation and procedures for verifying the age of anonymous visitors to their website that may include images some find objectionable.

Simple book, chapter and verse would suffice, instead of deflection and indication I am "pretending".

Dies Irae said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Quote:

---

Same comment applies. So I do not need to hear it.

---

---

It might apply, but only one got you to say something. Please educate Tanya of her poor form.

---

Sure.

Shame on you Tanya and leave the poor preacher's kids alone. We know they have it rough already.

Does that work oh day of wrath keeper of thread equity?

No
I wouldn't want my kid to do porn. It is a pretty short lived career.


But it shouldn't be illegal.

I don't want my kid supporting tceh or eating bacon, but that shouldn't be illegal either.


We are not a theocracy. The Bible cannot and will not be our guide for federal and state laws. The Constitution guides our country, not what version of Christianity you believe in.

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

You're so noble! So much better than us.

Who are we to judge the rapist!?

---

Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7 would seem to offer insight.

---

It says judge righteous judgment. First take the plank out, THEN take the spec out.

Certainly I have my sins. That does not preclude me from calling a spade a spade.

Rape is bad. Porn is bad. I judge them to be wrong things. I do not condemn. Only God does. I'm just telling you what He said.

---

Let us know which chapter and verse covers the subject of Texas HB 1181.

---

There are many on these subjects. You know that. Stop pretending not to.

---

I must have been absent the Sunday they went into the legalities of civil penalties for companies not showing adequate documentation and procedures for verifying the age of anonymous visitors to their website that may include images some find objectionable.

Simple book, chapter and verse would suffice, instead of deflection and indication I am "pretending".

---

Start here and until we get here we haven't gone far enough.

Luke 17:2 It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin.

Draw your own conclusions.

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.

Whooooweeee!

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.

---

They will burn in hell. They'd get off a lot easier than with me just wanting it to be illegal.

I dont apologize for protecting children.

TxAgPreacher 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.

---

They will burn in hell. They'd get off a lot easier than with me just wanting it to be illegal.

I dont apologize for protecting children.

---

Me neither.

Its why I don't make my child attend "houses of worship" run by holier than thous who claim to speak from the teachings of God / Jesus but instead get their rocks off by thinking they have divine power to judge and admonish others.

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher 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.

---

They will burn in hell. They'd get off a lot easier than with me just wanting it to be illegal.

I dont apologize for protecting children.

---

Me neither.

Its why I don't make my child attend "houses of worship" run by holier than thous who claim to speak from the teachings of God / Jesus but instead get their rocks off by thinking they have divine power to judge and admonish others.

---

pot kettle. At least I didn't defend a rapist pornogropher.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher 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.

---

They will burn in hell. They'd get off a lot easier than with me just wanting it to be illegal.

I dont apologize for protecting children.

---

Me neither.

Its why I don't make my child attend "houses of worship" run by holier than thous who claim to speak from the teachings of God / Jesus but instead get their rocks off by thinking they have divine power to judge and admonish others.

---

pot kettle.

---

Not sure you understand what you are saying. I am not the one sending others to hell as if I am St Peter himself manning the pearly gates.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher 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.

---

They will burn in hell. They'd get off a lot easier than with me just wanting it to be illegal.

I dont apologize for protecting children.

---

Me neither.

Its why I don't make my child attend "houses of worship" run by holier than thous who claim to speak from the teachings of God / Jesus but instead get their rocks off by thinking they have divine power to judge and admonish others.

---

pot kettle. At least I didn't defend a rapist pornogropher.

---

Nice strawman.

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher 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.

---

They will burn in hell. They'd get off a lot easier than with me just wanting it to be illegal.

I dont apologize for protecting children.

---

Me neither.

Its why I don't make my child attend "houses of worship" run by holier than thous who claim to speak from the teachings of God / Jesus but instead get their rocks off by thinking they have divine power to judge and admonish others.

---

pot kettle.

---

Not sure you understand what you are saying. I am not the one sending others to hell as if I am St Peter himself manning the pearly gates.

---

Not my words buddy. God said that about those who abuse the innocent.

Watching it online isn't much better.

It would be better if we had the guts to just say it's wrong and end it .

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher 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.

---

They will burn in hell. They'd get off a lot easier than with me just wanting it to be illegal.

I dont apologize for protecting children.

---

Me neither.

Its why I don't make my child attend "houses of worship" run by holier than thous who claim to speak from the teachings of God / Jesus but instead get their rocks off by thinking they have divine power to judge and admonish others.

---

pot kettle.

---

Not sure you understand what you are saying. I am not the one sending others to hell as if I am St Peter himself manning the pearly gates.

---

Peter would agree with me, because I'm just telling you the simple truth. What scripture says. You're arguing with Gods word not me.

And no I'm not the arbiter of truth. This one is clear cut though.

Dies Irae said:

---

JerryHelper said:

---

gbaby23 said:

---

Ban pornography at the federal level.

---

A real conservative here

---

Yeah, and thank God. Actual conservatives are finally breaking through the liberals conditioning.

"You have to let us put porn everywhere because if you don't you're a bad conservative"

Ban porn everywhere. It's a societal cancer and leads to nothing good.

---

Actually, I don't think anyone has said that. I have DEFINITELY not said that.

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

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

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Would you want your kid to do porn? Then why would you want anyone to?

---

Poor form to bring someone's kid into it.

---

He doesn't like it when others do it to him and expects an apology...but, apparently it's cool if HE does it, because...reasons?

Tanya 93 said:

---

No
I wouldn't want my kid to do porn. It is a pretty short lived career.


But it shouldn't be illegal.

I don't want my kid supporting tceh or eating bacon, but that shouldn't be illegal either.


We are not a theocracy. The Bible cannot and will not be our guide for federal and state laws. The Constitution guides our country, not what version of Christianity you believe in.

---

And it's HIS version of Christianity, not other versions of it that don't follow his rules to a T...

gbaby23 said:

---

Pinochet said:

---

So the benefits of banning alcohol outweigh your need to get drunk. Let's outlaw alcohol. There are countries that won't mind depriving you of your freedom of speech (or any other god-given rights). You should move there.

---

This Libertarian mindset is exactly the reason this country has devolved in state of ruin. Pornography is destructive and has no place in society. The current alcohol culture is the same and I wouldn't mind if it was banned until we got a handle on that too. I would also support restricting the speech of all Marxists and Communists, but the preferable plan would be to send them elsewhere.

---

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.

This thread is going down an one of the weirdest in F16 history.

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!"

Burdizzo said:

---

This thread is going down an one of the weirdest in F16 history.

---

Yeah...

Never thought I'd have to say I didn't support "horse ****ing".

But, it DID shine the light on the fake conservative totalitarians, though...

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!"

---

I haven't really looked. How is the "age verification" being done to meet the requirement?

I know the last gun site I visited had a verification window pop up - I clicked "Yes. I am 21 or over" and I was in. Now THAT is as useless as lifeguards during Olympic swimming.

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!"

---

Not only it age verification not effective online but who is going to determine which sites will need them?

tysker 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!"

---

Not only it age verification not effective online but who is going to determine which sites will need them?

---

THIS is the key to the power...

Make sure you're in the group of people that get to make the decisions.

Time and time again I have said that since trump took over the right wing has been moving more and more to less conservatism and more totalitarianism. The conservatives are no longer actual conservatives but liberals with right wing beliefs; this thread solidified that

fka ftc said:

---

TxAgPreacher 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.

---

They will burn in hell. They'd get off a lot easier than with me just wanting it to be illegal.

I dont apologize for protecting children.

---

Me neither.

Its why I don't make my child attend "houses of worship" run by holier than thous who claim to speak from the teachings of God / Jesus but instead get their rocks off by thinking they have divine power to judge and admonish others.

---

We don't often agree but we do on this thread and you are killing it

Ag with kids said:

---

Burdizzo said:

---

This thread is going down an one of the weirdest in F16 history.

---

Yeah...

Never thought I'd have to say I didn't support "horse ****ing".

But, it DID shine the light on the fake conservative totalitarians, though...

---

You still haven't made the bridge between "horses can't consent" and "we don't make horses consent to anything"

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

gbaby23 said:

---

Ban pornography at the federal level.

---

Friendly reminders this thread was only about minors for 3 posts until this yokel showed up.

crane said:

---

Time and time again I have said that since trump took over the right wing has been moving more and more to less conservatism and more totalitarianism. The conservatives are no longer actual conservatives but liberals with right wing beliefs; this thread solidified that

---

You have no clue what liberal means. You're actually using the name backwards. Liberals believe you should be able to do what you want to unfettered of ideas such as morals or the notion of right and wrong.

In your bizarro world, Conservatives are pro-gay marriage, drug use, prostitution and porn, and it is no wonder you find yourself confused

Ag with kids 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!"

---

I haven't really looked. How is the "age verification" being done to meet the requirement?

I know the last gun site I visited had a verification window pop up - I clicked "Yes. I am 21 or over" and I was in. Now THAT is as useless as lifeguards during Olympic swimming.

---

You have to input a government ID

Tanya 93 said:

---

No
I wouldn't want my kid to do porn. It is a pretty short lived career.


But it shouldn't be illegal.

I don't want my kid supporting tceh or eating bacon, but that shouldn't be illegal either.


We are not a theocracy. The Bible cannot and will not be our guide for federal and state laws. The Constitution guides our country, not what version of Christianity you believe in.

---

How do people say stuff like this with a straight face? The people who wrote the constitution banned all sorts of things at a state and federal level based on religious beliefs while swearing on Bibles.

Throughout our entire history as a country we have used Christian based morality as a rubric for what should be allowed and what shouldn't be allowed.

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.