javajaws said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

javajaws said:

---

JobSecurity said:

---

Bunch of prudes and olds in this thread

---

The religious right loves to censor and restrict your freedom just as much as the leftists. It shouldn't amaze me how hypocritical each are of the other yet here we are....losing more freedom and personal responsibility each day while our government grows ever more powerful.

Pretty damn frightening if you ask me.

---

We're talking about kids and porn, right?

---

To some of you'll that's all it is, sure. But to some its about the bigger picture of freedom and government oppression. A little law here, a little law there...just keep chipping away and push that agenda!

That's exactly what the leftists do just on a different set of issues. But really, they are two sides of the same coin - wanting the government to be your mommy and daddy and take personal responsibility and freedom away from you. Yet you'll are too short sighted to see it - you see a great policy win for your agenda and stop there.

A lot of so called "conservatives" on this board are far from it. Those that support this sort of infringement on our freedom are no better than the leftists they argue about on this same board daily.

If you don't like your kids watching porn - why not block them from it? What? Too hard? Stop being lazy and educate yourself on how to do it instead. Or better yet, educate your kids on the so-called "evils" you believe in as to why it is bad for them. And for the record I don't think kids should be watching porn either - but it should be up to their parents to make that happen not the government (federal OR state). Not that this law will actually stop them or anything - that's just ignorance of technology letting you believe that.

Go ahead and flame away, I don't care - if it makes you feel better have at it. But so-called "conservatives" that support this sort of legislation are still hypocrites.

---

There's a lot of truth in this post. Yes, both the left and right seek to use the power of government to create the society they desire. I don't look to government to do much of anything to mold society. That being said, kids are a different issue. However, THAT, being said, parents should be the first line of protection. How many of the kids this law seeks to protect pay their own internet and phone bills? Look to who's paying those bills first. It's analogous to the border crisis in that way. Who's paying the phone bills of all the illegals shown in those caravans?

Aggies1322 said:

---

HumbleAg04 said:

---

Online age check is wrong for gun manufacturers for the same reason it is wrong for porn.

Parent better.

---

Guns are a constitutional right - porn is not.

---

The 1st Amendment tends to disagree. I'd also argue that a Christian fundamentalist government is as bad as a Muslim fundamentalist government.

I know defending things you don't personally or morally agree with is hard but that is the point of liberty and freedom.

All the arguments made about porn being dangerous and unhealthy are made daily by anti-2A groups. The government is not your nanny. Any invitation of government into your personal life that doesn't directly harm or infringe on the rights of someone else is wrong.

CS Lewis was nails:

" Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

HumbleAg04 said:

---

Aggies1322 said:

---

HumbleAg04 said:

---

Online age check is wrong for gun manufacturers for the same reason it is wrong for porn.

Parent better.

---

Guns are a constitutional right - porn is not.

---

The 1st Amendment tends to disagree. I'd also argue that a Christian fundamentalist government is as bad as a Muslim fundamentalist government.

I know defending things you don't personally or morally agree with is hard but that is the point of liberty and freedom.

All the arguments made about porn being dangerous and unhealthy are made daily by anti-2A groups. The government is not your nanny. Any invitation of government into your personal life that doesn't directly harm or infringe on the rights of someone else is wrong.

CS Lewis was nails:

" Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

---

I'm a follower of Christ first and foremost- above being a conservative American. Show me where in the 1st amendment watching porn is located? It's not an issue of free speech or of press. Or to peaceably assemble or petition the government. So you'll have to point out how it violates the 1st.

HumbleAg04 said:

---

Aggies1322 said:

---

HumbleAg04 said:

---

Online age check is wrong for gun manufacturers for the same reason it is wrong for porn.

Parent better.

---

Guns are a constitutional right - porn is not.

---

The 1st Amendment tends to disagree. I'd also argue that a Christian fundamentalist government is as bad as a Muslim fundamentalist government.

I know defending things you don't personally or morally agree with is hard but that is the point of liberty and freedom.

All the arguments made about porn being dangerous and unhealthy are made daily by anti-2A groups. The government is not your nanny. Any invitation of government into your personal life that doesn't directly harm or infringe on the rights of someone else is wrong.

CS Lewis was nails:

" Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

---

So people should be able to just have sex in public areas and parks. Advertisements should be able to show explicit sex scenes. You must not be against Drag Queen shows that invite kids to come and watch. That is all cool, because protected 1st amendment free speech right? Or is it somehow not like general 1st amendment rights...

The 1st amendment does not disagree. That is the right to speech. How is asking for age to consume porn restricting that right? It's not.

By your logic, laws that prevent minors from buying porn magazines at the corner store also violate the first. You have to do an ID check for that.

You need to rethink your position.

texagbeliever said:

---

taxpreparer said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

javajaws said:

---

JobSecurity said:

---

Bunch of prudes and olds in this thread

---

The religious right loves to censor and restrict your freedom just as much as the leftists. It shouldn't amaze me how hypocritical each are of the other yet here we are....losing more freedom and personal responsibility each day while our government grows ever more powerful.

Pretty damn frightening if you ask me.

---

We're talking about kids and porn, right?

---

To some of you'll that's all it is, sure. But to some its about the bigger picture of freedom and government oppression. A little law here, a little law there...just keep chipping away and push that agenda!

That's exactly what the leftists do just on a different set of issues. But really, they are two sides of the same coin - wanting the government to be your mommy and daddy and take personal responsibility and freedom away from you. Yet you'll are too short sighted to see it - you see a great policy win for your agenda and stop there.

A lot of so called "conservatives" on this board are far from it. Those that support this sort of infringement on our freedom are no better than the leftists they argue about on this same board daily.

If you don't like your kids watching porn - why not block them from it? What? Too hard? Stop being lazy and educate yourself on how to do it instead. Or better yet, educate your kids on the so-called "evils" you believe in as to why it is bad for them. And for the record I don't think kids should be watching porn either - but it should be up to their parents to make that happen not the government (federal OR state). Not that this law will actually stop them or anything - that's just ignorance of technology letting you believe that.

Go ahead and flame away, I don't care - if it makes you feel better have at it. But so-called "conservatives" that support this sort of legislation are still hypocrites.

---

Friendly reminder that porn has always been age restricted. So what is the problem all of a sudden?

---

I posted the problem earlier. It is grown adults that do not want to give up their anonymity to watch free porn. I would not bevsurprised if most of those complaining (and a surprising number of those that support this) watch free porn semi-regularly.

---

The question they SHOULD be asking themselves is, why is it important that they are able to watch porn anonymously?
The answer is shame. Yet they are glad to cover up their shame even if it means more and more kids suffer the terrible trap that is porn especially porn consumption at a young age. Also this isn't likely the porn most of the 30+ people got addicted to. This is algorithm enhanced social engineering meant to create a highly addicted customer for life.

---

Thank you, your last two posts expressed my thoughts much better than my own.

Irish 2.0 said:

---

Time to dust off the ol Girls Gone WIld DVDs!

---

VPN Virtual Private Network set to: Canada

I was going to say VPN are widely used for this type of issue. Age verification, skirting various national censorship or content restriction laws, regional content filters, etc. It makes most of this end user verification either have to be extremely intrusive for the user, or pretty much symbolic.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I was going to say VPN are widely used for this type of issue. Age verification, skirting various national censorship or content restriction laws, regional content filters, etc. It makes most of this end user verification either have to be extremely intrusive for the user, or pretty much symbolic.

---

I would suspect that girls would be far less likely to go to the trouble of using a VPN. They are actually the most likely to be protected by this.

Second, a VPN is going to be tough for an 10-12 to figure out. Perhaps once they get to 13/14 it isn't too hard but still that is another step. Only the really dedicated will go to those steps. If during the public sex education class (really sex get you addicted to it class), they learn about anal and oral sex. But want to learn more and google it. Well now instead of being able to see the videos they will just get descriptions. That is a plus in my book.

texagbeliever said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

javajaws said:

---

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

---

javajaws said:

---

JobSecurity said:

---

Bunch of prudes and olds in this thread

---

The religious right loves to censor and restrict your freedom just as much as the leftists. It shouldn't amaze me how hypocritical each are of the other yet here we are....losing more freedom and personal responsibility each day while our government grows ever more powerful.

Pretty damn frightening if you ask me.

---

We're talking about kids and porn, right?

---

To some of you'll that's all it is, sure. But to some its about the bigger picture of freedom and government oppression. A little law here, a little law there...just keep chipping away and push that agenda!

That's exactly what the leftists do just on a different set of issues. But really, they are two sides of the same coin - wanting the government to be your mommy and daddy and take personal responsibility and freedom away from you. Yet you'll are too short sighted to see it - you see a great policy win for your agenda and stop there.

A lot of so called "conservatives" on this board are far from it. Those that support this sort of infringement on our freedom are no better than the leftists they argue about on this same board daily.

If you don't like your kids watching porn - why not block them from it? What? Too hard? Stop being lazy and educate yourself on how to do it instead. Or better yet, educate your kids on the so-called "evils" you believe in as to why it is bad for them. And for the record I don't think kids should be watching porn either - but it should be up to their parents to make that happen not the government (federal OR state). Not that this law will actually stop them or anything - that's just ignorance of technology letting you believe that.

Go ahead and flame away, I don't care - if it makes you feel better have at it. But so-called "conservatives" that support this sort of legislation are still hypocrites.

---

Friendly reminder that porn has always been age restricted. So what is the problem all of a sudden?

---

Because they feel shame for consuming porn and having to confirm their ID is something they don't want to do.

Let's just logically walk through this.
1. Should Porn be illegal for persons under the age of 18. Yes, there is more than sufficent medical information on the harm and damage that porn does to kids who consume porn at a young age. This doesn't even take into account kids around kids who consume porn.
2. So if porn is illegal for people under the age of 18, why is are online companies not responsible for curtailing the audience of porn to just those legally able. Restaraunts and bars are liable if the person consuming alcohol is under 21. Gun shops are responsible for people buying guns under 21. Yet because it is online porn sites get a free pass.

For those upset about this law. Ask yourself, why do you want porn to be more accessible to kids. That's it. If it is because porn isn't a big deal, you are wrong. If it is because your freedoms, then why haven't you been vocal about any other age restriction limitation. The mind will go to great lengths to justify hedonistic desires.

---

I said before, there should be no restrictions of any kind on access to the internet.

texagbeliever said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I was going to say VPN are widely used for this type of issue. Age verification, skirting various national censorship or content restriction laws, regional content filters, etc. It makes most of this end user verification either have to be extremely intrusive for the user, or pretty much symbolic.

---

I would suspect that girls would be far less likely to go to the trouble of using a VPN. They are actually the most likely to be protected by this.

Second, a VPN is going to be tough for an 10-12 to figure out. Perhaps once they get to 13/14 it isn't too hard but still that is another step. Only the really dedicated will go to those steps. If during the public sex education class (really sex get you addicted to it class), they learn about anal and oral sex. But want to learn more and google it. Well now instead of being able to see the videos they will just get descriptions. That is a plus in my book.

---

Any kid that online games a lot can and knows how to easily use a VPN. And when it comes to kids, if one knows they all know.

I'm shocked a guy that boasted about having sex with an eastern European prostitute (likely groomed as a girl so you contributed to sex trafficking) has no issues with free access to porn. Your moral standards just seem so high...

gabehcoud said:

---

verification is nothing more that clicking a checkbox that your over 18. Paxton is just grandstanding

---

Nope not anymore.

sites are using some "data verification" service where you have to prove you are over 18.

no thanks!

Teslag said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I was going to say VPN are widely used for this type of issue. Age verification, skirting various national censorship or content restriction laws, regional content filters, etc. It makes most of this end user verification either have to be extremely intrusive for the user, or pretty much symbolic.

---

I would suspect that girls would be far less likely to go to the trouble of using a VPN. They are actually the most likely to be protected by this.

Second, a VPN is going to be tough for an 10-12 to figure out. Perhaps once they get to 13/14 it isn't too hard but still that is another step. Only the really dedicated will go to those steps. If during the public sex education class (really sex get you addicted to it class), they learn about anal and oral sex. But want to learn more and google it. Well now instead of being able to see the videos they will just get descriptions. That is a plus in my book.

---

Any kid that online games a lot can and knows how to easily use a VPN. And when it comes to kids, if one knows they all know.

---

This is garbage.

texagbeliever said:

---

I'm shocked a guy that boasted about having sex with an eastern European prostitute (likely groomed as a girl so you contributed to sex trafficking) has no issues with free access to porn. Your moral standards just seem so high...

---

We should should have free access to anything we want. If you don't want your kids to have it, then parent them.

texagbeliever said:

---

Teslag said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I was going to say VPN are widely used for this type of issue. Age verification, skirting various national censorship or content restriction laws, regional content filters, etc. It makes most of this end user verification either have to be extremely intrusive for the user, or pretty much symbolic.

---

I would suspect that girls would be far less likely to go to the trouble of using a VPN. They are actually the most likely to be protected by this.

Second, a VPN is going to be tough for an 10-12 to figure out. Perhaps once they get to 13/14 it isn't too hard but still that is another step. Only the really dedicated will go to those steps. If during the public sex education class (really sex get you addicted to it class), they learn about anal and oral sex. But want to learn more and google it. Well now instead of being able to see the videos they will just get descriptions. That is a plus in my book.

---

Any kid that online games a lot can and knows how to easily use a VPN. And when it comes to kids, if one knows they all know.

---

This is garbage.

---

It's not, I assure you.

I agree, anything to make the process more complicated helps, but kids are incredibly good at figuring this stuff out, and at a young age. But yes, reducing the return of this stuff in "casual" search results by adding layers of effort helps.

Aggies1322 said:

---

HumbleAg04 said:

---

Aggies1322 said:

---

HumbleAg04 said:

---

Online age check is wrong for gun manufacturers for the same reason it is wrong for porn.

Parent better.

---

Guns are a constitutional right - porn is not.

---

The 1st Amendment tends to disagree. I'd also argue that a Christian fundamentalist government is as bad as a Muslim fundamentalist government.

I know defending things you don't personally or morally agree with is hard but that is the point of liberty and freedom.

All the arguments made about porn being dangerous and unhealthy are made daily by anti-2A groups. The government is not your nanny. Any invitation of government into your personal life that doesn't directly harm or infringe on the rights of someone else is wrong.

CS Lewis was nails:

" Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

---

I'm a follower of Christ first and foremost- above being a conservative American. Show me where in the 1st amendment watching porn is located? It's not an issue of free speech or of press. Or to peaceably assemble or petition the government. So you'll have to point out how it violates the 1st.

---

There was a movement to outlaw porn long ago. SCOTUS struck it down saying that it was protected under the 1st Amendment. So it's protected under free speech.

Link - Miller vs. California

Of course the restriction of producing porn is a 1st amendment issue.

That's not what is being discussed.

Teslag said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

I'm shocked a guy that boasted about having sex with an eastern European prostitute (likely groomed as a girl so you contributed to sex trafficking) has no issues with free access to porn. Your moral standards just seem so high...

---

We should should have free access to anything we want. If you don't want your kids to have it, then parent them.

---

Wow this is your response. Okay.

Because it's the truth you don't want to accept. The government doesn't exist to parent your kids for you.

That isn't a "truth". That is some made up strawman.

Why does the government not allow kids to buy guns, consent to sex with adults, buy cigarettes, drive a car, etc?

Because for reasonable thinking adults, some things in society should be restricted. And so help me if you keep up this huge Libertarian image on this thread I'm going to lose my mind. You are anything but and your posting record confirms that.

I am extremely consistent in my beliefs to limit government.

VPNs are staple advertisements in most YouTube/Twitch content geared towards kids/younger adults. NordVPN I think is the one I see most often.

These aren't the proxies of yesteryear that required a degree of tech-savviness to employ; modern VPNs are as easy as opening the app and selecting what country you want to be in. In other words, well within the technical abilities of any kid that has a computer or smart phone.

However, this will largely be unnecessary as the extreme majority of pornography on the internet is hosted/uploaded on sites based overseas, and still easily accessible . Posturing by Abbott and PH, but in the end nothing has really been accomplished as far as protecting kids.

If you weren't monitoring your child's internet usage before, they can still easily access pornography now. I would argue pornography isn't even the greatest danger to children - social apps like discord or Telegram where grooming run rampant are.

TL;DR - When your teenager is hyper-sexualized, part of multiple alt lifestyle communities, has 10 different fetishes, and you're looking to find out who to hold accountable for failing xim/xyr… you still need to look in the mirror.

Ukraine war, vaccines, etc.
You are right you are extremely consistent. Just not in the way you think you are.

Logos Stick said:

---

Of course the restriction of producing porn is a 1st amendment issue.

That's not what is being discussed.

---

Blocking access to porn, in this case, would be equal to blocking access to NPR, Fox News or any media outlet. I'm not saying I agree with it.

I have to agree with others. Think of all the stupid laws we have to protect ourselves from being responsible parents.

• Possible tic tok ban - Monitor your kids and take their phone away.
• The war on drugs and making them illegal to protect my poor kid. Why is your kid doing drugs to begin with? Monitor your kid and make sure that they are OK!
• Blocking access to porn. Why is your teenager even bothering to look at porn? Parent your damn kid
• Texting laws. We already have laws against distracted driving, yet we need more laws because our damn kids HAVE to text. No, they don't. PARENT YOUR DAMN KIDS.
• Underage drinking...

Perhaps your kids are watching porn because they are interested in sex and are hearing about it from others and you have spent so much time making it seem like its a bad thing? I'm not saying that I'm the best parent, but I've been damn lucky to have a very open and honest relationship with my now 21 year old whose worst thing that she ever did was get caught on reddit when she was 16. Be a damn parent and stop expecting the government to parent for you

Typical Texags. The argument was not age restricting access, but how invasive that would be to people legally allowed to access the content. All the "conservatives" come out of the woodwork to virtue signal and change the subject to tell everyone the reasons porn is bad. Any argument they can't intelligently address is met with "oh then you must want kids to watch porn" and "it's obvious they just wanted to get to the kids." One poster actually posted a statement from PH saying it was about the cost and told everyone it meant they wanted to corrupt kids. Mix in a healthy batch of not reading the ****ing law you're arguing for and we get to 6 pages of it.

If you want this law to stand, first read the ****ing law and then make an honest argument against those who are concerned that allowing the tracking of access to this will lead to tracking your viewing of guns or alcohol on the internet, or that it won't create a precedent that allows a state to say that anything critical of the alphabet mafia is now age restricted and only pro drag show will be unrestricted. Don't make these dishonest "you must want kids to see porn" arguments.

I've never advocated anything mandatory with vaccines or for boots on ground in Ukraine.

Extremely consistent. We don't need government to be nanny. Parent. Or church.

Pinochet said:

---

Typical Texags. The argument was not age restricting access, but how invasive that would be to people legally allowed to access the content. All the "conservatives" come out of the woodwork to virtue signal and change the subject to tell everyone the reasons porn is bad. Any argument they can't intelligently address is met with "oh then you must want kids to watch porn" and "it's obvious they just wanted to get to the kids." One poster actually posted a statement from PH saying it was about the cost and told everyone it meant they wanted to corrupt kids. Mix in a healthy batch of not reading the ****ing law you're arguing for and we get to 6 pages of it.

If you want this law to stand, first read the ****ing law and then make an honest argument against those who are concerned that allowing the tracking of access to this will lead to tracking your viewing of guns or alcohol on the internet, or that it won't create a precedent that allows a state to say that anything critical of the alphabet mafia is now age restricted and only pro drag show will be unrestricted. Don't make these dishonest "you must want kids to see porn" arguments.

---

Right?

Now let's let the FBI regulate something THEY don't like.

Charpie said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Of course the restriction of producing porn is a 1st amendment issue.

That's not what is being discussed.

---

Blocking access to porn, in this case, would be equal to blocking access to NPR, Fox News or any media outlet. I'm not saying I agree with it.

I have to agree with others. Think of all the stupid laws we have to protect ourselves from being responsible parents.

• Possible tic tok ban - Monitor your kids and take their phone away.
• The war on drugs and making them illegal to protect my poor kid. Why is your kid doing drugs to begin with? Monitor your kid and make sure that they are OK!
• Blocking access to porn. Why is your teenager even bothering to look at porn? Parent your damn kid
• Texting laws. We already have laws against distracted driving, yet we need more laws because our damn kids HAVE to text. No, they don't. PARENT YOUR DAMN KIDS.
• Underage drinking...

Perhaps your kids are watching porn because they are interested in sex and are hearing about it from others and you have spent so much time making it seem like its a bad thing? I'm not saying that I'm the best parent, but I've been damn lucky to have a very open and honest relationship with my now 21 year old whose worst thing that she ever did was get caught on reddit when she was 16. Be a damn parent and stop expecting the government to parent for you

---

Brilliant

How can you have different rules for 2 different places?

Rule 1: Kids can't buy porn in a physical store. It is age restricted
Rule 2: Kids can buy porn online. It isn't age restricted.

In what logical world is the above at all rational?

Nothing turns moderates into libertarians faster than protecting kids access to porn. What a shocker.

texagbeliever said:

---

How can you have different rules for 2 different places?

Rule 1: Kids can't buy porn in a physical store. It is age restricted
Rule 2: Kids can buy porn online. It isn't age restricted.

In what logical world is the above at all rational?

---

You literally just ignored my post to make your argument. Read it again.

Blocking access to porn for minors has nothing to do with free speech.

That's been the law of the land all over the nation since printed porn became a thing.

When porn went to video, it was also the law of the land. 10 year olds couldn't go into blockbuster to rent porn videos.

It's not a speech issue here. The porn producers are not being restricted.

texagbeliever said:

---

Nothing turns moderates into libertarians faster than protecting kids access to porn. What a shocker.

---

You couldn't be a better example. I talk about tracking and even predict this. You ignore and make it about wanting to give kids access to porn.