May surprise you I feel differently about state and local governments taking action close to the people than I do about the federal government doing the same.
Longing for anarchy and a world without any government is stupid and nonsensical.
State of Kentucky has blocked access to Pornhub.
- Thread starter Robcatt24
- Start date
May surprise you I feel differently about state and local governments taking action close to the people than I do about the federal government doing the same.
Longing for anarchy and a world without any government is stupid and nonsensical.
Who said ''without''? I believe I argued for ''limited'' government. I'm not an ancap.
You're fine with government over-reach. Because it gives you a false sense of security and safety. And you're perfectly fine if that comes from the state or local level. Showing ID to use your computer? Fine, it's for the ''greater good'' Because? They're ''close to the people''?????
Aren't reps close to their district of people as well?
Didn't you flip shit during covid for mask mandates, lockdowns, etc etc? But this time it's ok. Because you support it?
I guess Beshear's covid rules were fine in retrospect. He was close to the people.
What is it I keep telling you? Something something horseshoe.
If you’re consuming so much goddam porn you view age verification requirements on pornographic websites as “showing ID to use your computer,” I don’t know what to tell you.
Again man, if you don’t understand the governor implementing policies by directive in response to an overblown threat vs a state legislature unanimously passing legislation in response to a real, documented threat to children, I don’t know what to tell you.
If you want to sell age restricted products to consumers, you should be required to ensure you’re deriving profit from people who can legally purchase your goods. Sorry if that means every time you use your computer you’re showing your ID.
Don't back pedal now. You said you hope it expands to include ''harmful internet content'' Therefore, one must think. If your PC or Phone has acess to the internet, it has harmful internet content on it. So in order to protect children from seeing such, we must show ID verification.
Mask mandates and lockdowns were government over-reach. Showing ID to make a reddit account, or use your phone or PC is fine. Because you support it.
You aren't so much different than those ''libs'' you berate.
Fine then. I’ll compromise with the libs. Mask mandates and government lockdowns were absolutely government overreach, but if they want to make sure pornhub, Facebook, instagram, etc. are age verifying users before they access adult content or post personal information online, I’m ok with that overreach because I think it outweighs the harm.
I’m not so blindly married to a mindset that I can’t objectively evaluate facts and make decisions.
At least you're honest about being an authoritarian.
You call someone who advocates actual limited government and freedom. ''Blindy married to a mindset''. Lol.
''I’ll compromise with the Trumpers. Showing ID to use social media and using your devices were absolutely government overreach, but if they want to make sure others safety is protected. By enforcing mask mandates and lockdowns, I’m ok with that overreach because I think it outweighs the harm''.
Same people.
Ok. That’s fine. Have the state legislature unanimously pass mask mandates to protect you from Covid. I’ll move to Ohio, but if you want to support something that stupid, have at it.
But it's fine for your side to pass similar ideals?
Government over-reach is on both sides. You aren't for limited government or anything of that BS. You're just an auth-right republican. Go vote for your side. So you can get to banning video games and weed.
I’ve explained to you why they aren’t similar.
But if they were, yes I’m fine if the state legislature does things I agree with, and I will leave the state if they do things I strongly disagree with.
That's cool. We disagree on how this should be approached. I don't think any further discourse is going to change any minds. Have a good day.
Search engines already do moderate content to their hearts' and pocketbooks' desire, just as congress has failed to include these other providers you mention. Search engines are not media nor free speech. They are private, for profit, businesses. They don't make money directly from providing porn, but through allowing it to be linked/advertised. They don't do enough to moderate illegal content, but they easily have that ability and choose not to, just like the porn sites did and do.
Ok thanks for that. So you’re saying the government has to regulate search results?
Kids need to grow up watching scrambled porn where all you hear is moaning and occasionally catch a glimpse of a possible boob.
Yes. Right-auths want everything regulated. While also screaming about government over-reach. When the left does the same to them.
It made a man of me. All I had was a misshapen nipple and an imagination.
Or, crazy idea here, they'll continue to do business where they can and generate a shit ton of profit and those who want to seek out the easily accessible porn that is based in Denmark or Germany will become a new "largest player" with loads of revenge porn and possibly illegal content.
All of your examples will make more sense when I have to submit my driver's license to a server (i.e. database) every time I want to buy a beer. Until then, this is pearl clutching.
I can’t believe this thread has made this many pages. It’s like you all are ready to fight over the right to jerk off without In your face devilish stimulus.
Shameful. Get me a sears catalog and a shower and call it good.
Shameful. Get me a sears catalog and a shower and call it good.
All you need to know about this poster right here. No need to say anything further. He doesn't care that human trafficking helps produce a great deal of the porn out there. He doesn't care what anything does to anyone.
He doesn't want the govt to enforce laws. He doesn't want criminals to be accountable for anything, nor does he want to be accountable for anything. From the comments here, there are a LOT of posters just like him.
Fkn hilarious. "Easier to get a gun" is straight bullsht, but it's funny nonetheless. Good one
Good ole auth-right.
Evangelical organizations like Exodus Cry/Trafficking Hub are falsely linking pornography with sex trafficking in an effort to boost support for banning porn outright. They’re joined by wealthy agribusiness barons, accused of human trafficking themselves, who are currently funding disinformation campaigns to implicate porn in human trafficking.
These groups greatly exaggerate the prevalence of and demand for sex trafficking, stating for instance that sex trafficking is a $150 billion industry. In reality, $150 billion is the International Labor Organization (ILO) estimate for human trafficking as a whole, not sex trafficking. Only 19% of human trafficking victims are trafficked for sex. Industries like farming, fishing, and domestic labor make up the majority of trafficking. There’s no credible evidence of a boom in commercial sex trafficking in the United States or to suggest more American men are going abroad to partake in commercial sex trafficking.
Rates of sex trafficking in the US aren’t rising. The wider availability of online porn has actually coincided with a massive decrease in sexual violence against women and teen pregnancy rates.
Despite this, 16 states have declared pornography a “public health crisis,” a first step toward banning porn. Many conservative commentators are calling for porn bans and further erosion of Section 230. In 2021, the Utah legislature passed HB72, which requires manufacturers to add porn filters to all cell phones and tablets sold to Utah customers.
Why Libertarians Should Care About the War On Sex | Libertarian Party
By Cathy ReisenwitzOriginally published in LPNews, 2022 Spring Edition As the War on Drugs begins to ramp down after 50 years of failure and devastation, authoritarians are hardly going quietly into that good night. The nanny state never sleeps, and the new moral panic is the scourge of sex...
www.lp.org
I hope you pay for everything in cash if you don’t want your purchasing behavior tracked in a database. And your web and location data is also all recorded unless you’re taking extreme measures.
Or maybe you use incognito mode so all you data is super super secret.
Not a ton of protective measures but I don't have to upload photographic evidence of my name, address etc. just to buy a beer, bass guitar or latest pornographic offering. Using data trends from search engines and email group listings from retail locations is not the same thing that this law is enforcing.
If I want to be particularly careful about what I do online I'll use an e2e VPN, but most often that isn't required. Even still, web and online data is not the same as photo identification with specific demographic information. Does a website know if I searched for flights to NYC last week? Sure, does it know my eye color and hair color? Not unless I gave up that information willingly. And if I did, that's on me to rectify, but saying ISPs/Advertisers/etc. collect your data and making it comparable to providing a copy of your ID to access a website aren't remotely the same, in my opinion.
Again, show me how this bill inhibits anyone (minors or otherwise) from accessing content. It doesn't, won't and never will.
Good ole auth-right.
Evangelical organizations like Exodus Cry/Trafficking Hub are falsely linking pornography with sex trafficking in an effort to boost support for banning porn outright. They’re joined by wealthy agribusiness barons, accused of human trafficking themselves, who are currently funding disinformation campaigns to implicate porn in human trafficking.
These groups greatly exaggerate the prevalence of and demand for sex trafficking, stating for instance that sex trafficking is a $150 billion industry. In reality, $150 billion is the International Labor Organization (ILO) estimate for human trafficking as a whole, not sex trafficking. Only 19% of human trafficking victims are trafficked for sex. Industries like farming, fishing, and domestic labor make up the majority of trafficking. There’s no credible evidence of a boom in commercial sex trafficking in the United States or to suggest more American men are going abroad to partake in commercial sex trafficking.
Rates of sex trafficking in the US aren’t rising. The wider availability of online porn has actually coincided with a massive decrease in sexual violence against women and teen pregnancy rates.
Despite this, 16 states have declared pornography a “public health crisis,” a first step toward banning porn. Many conservative commentators are calling for porn bans and further erosion of Section 230. In 2021, the Utah legislature passed HB72, which requires manufacturers to add porn filters to all cell phones and tablets sold to Utah customers.
Why Libertarians Should Care About the War On Sex | Libertarian Party
By Cathy ReisenwitzOriginally published in LPNews, 2022 Spring Edition As the War on Drugs begins to ramp down after 50 years of failure and devastation, authoritarians are hardly going quietly into that good night. The nanny state never sleeps, and the new moral panic is the scourge of sex...
You love a good fallacy, don't you. Lol.
Porn IS first and foremost a mental health issue that can and often does become a physical health and wellness issue. Sexual violence isn't just against women, but also children, and no one is stupid enough to assert that child prn isn't a big problem. Correlation with lower teen pregnancy rates doesn't mean jack, either.
"Oh NO! Porn filters on cell phones and tablets! This is a threat to our very existence as a country.... and our democracy!"
What's great is that the bill didn't have to inhibit anything. PH did that for them, because they decided not to comply. Their choice. No one forced them to do so.
A bill is not meant to inhibit anything, and the less disingenuous know that. Bills create a means of enforcement for those unwilling to abide by already established laws. It's illegal for a minor to access porn. It's illegal for a merchant to sell AND DISTRIBUTE it to a minor seeking it.
No. You can't prevent a criminal from breaking the law by passing one. Everyone should know that. Enforcing a punishment for doing it and writing in more restrictions for those not efforting to prevent illegal activity is part of writing laws. If PH and the like voluntarily did more to stop illegal distribution and viewing, the bill would've been unnecessary.
They clearly are mad they can't get away with selling this stuff to minors, so they blocked every porn addict in KY to get the very responses we see here. Very similar reactions seen when the Surgeon General forced warnings onto cigarette labels and the states got rid of smoking in enclosed spaces, both by tobacco companies and the addicts they created. Weird
The nanny state is already here, btw, and it soon will be as bad as China, NK, or worse. I'd rather have it work for health where possible than against it.
Best of health to everyone here. You'll get your PH back soon enough. No one in congress has got the stones to keep this in place, or PH will find a work around. Probably found their own VPN company
Best of health to everyone here. You'll get your PH back soon enough. No one in congress has got the stones to keep this in place, or PH will find a work around. Probably found their own VPN company
This is idealism over realism. We can talk the pros (there are actually some) and cons of pornography, but human nature will seek out eroticism and people seeking money or attention will provide it as long as there is a vehicle for it. It’s a profession as old as humanity.
What would be more productive is to focus on the causality of pornography and trafficking then work to limit that rather than make a blanket claim that pornography == trafficking. That’s also assuming it’s factual. I have not studied that, but I’d like to see objective data on how many in the porn industry are there against their will — then what the commonality is among those people. That claim strikes me as a glaring generalization.
Btw if you actually read this thread you’d see device filters proposed as a solution to the problem. And I’d say that would be more effective than the impotent government legislation being discussed
Is anyone arguing porn is good or isn't bad? No. The argument is how you go about restricting it.
It's aright though. I get it. If Trump or whoever the current authority is. Came out today and said ''we will now be banning weed, porn, video games, and every religion but christianity''. You'd swoon and support it like no tomorrow. Just how you auth-righters are.
''My children shouldn't be taught CRT. And other leftist BS''!
''Get the 10 commandments back in the classroom''.
And on and on it goes.
Hilarious that you wanna paint everyone with privacy concerns. Or over reach concerns a ''porn addict''. Or whatever. Gives you a good moral cover. To usher in whatever social-authortitarian measure is on the menu today.
''Durr, look at these coomers. Just mad they can't watch porn! Anyway, hand over your ID so you can post on twitter''.
Good health to you as well. This is just internet discussion at the end of the day. And nothing we say will change anything.
Last edited:
Honestly legal and regulated prostitution would probably do more to take care of sex trafficking than anything else.
Restrictions vs pornhub and vs the phone manufacturers are on equal ground. One is no more intrusive than the other.
I agree forcing phone manufacturers to include better child content restrictions is reasonable and actually achieves the desired goals. Thats where all the energy should be focused.
We will probably never see it despite it making tons of sense. Too much money for lobbying.
And people will kill people when they desire and choose to do so. People who do it well will provide that service as long as others are willing to pay for it. It's as old as humanity.
You're right, I guess we shouldn't make laws to help prevent murders or to punish people that facilitate murder.
This fallacy stuff is fun...
Which I didn't do. Again, your reading comprehension sucks.
Lol. The generalizations are all yours. Your comments are funny. Because you think that anyone put into that industry against their will is able to be objectively interviewed. There are parts of the industry that are professional organizations with willing and paid participants and there are parts that involve neither. The naivete and self-delusion it takes to view it as either all this or that, and it all being above board is beyond belief.
Lol. I read it. I wasn't talking about device filters for a reason-
So it's "auth-right" as someone here says when it suits you, for them to force device makers to create the filters and make them available, but not ok when it doesn't suit you.... I get it. There are already such things out there, not that anyone sold out to porn would care. There are also work arounds, as there always are.
What everyone here is avoiding is the subject of exposure to it in the first place. That's what hooks children and creates both desire and shame. It's not any different than sexual abuse and how it's continued/committed in higher percentages by victims when they reach adulthood. I saw exposure to porn lead people to use and sexually abuse others at early ages over decades. You can stay in your little "denial bubble" you've created around it all you want. Won't change the truth of it.
It's the initial exposure and ongoing exposure among the youth population that they are trying to curb, and have temporarily, if only in a small way. Some is better than none.
You and KAB love a good string of fallacies. It's like watching CNN. Nice work
Thank you. Much appreciated.
Directly and where we can see it, no, it might not change anything.
The nanny or surveillance state/big brother/social scoring govt overreach is here and has been. Agencies in the govt actually facilitated the distribution of illegal goods on the internet and streets for decades instead of trying to truly put an end to it. They assert the resulting arrests prove the method is good, when the fact is that they have the ability to frame up anyone in this manner.
An artist friend of mine was going to do a whole series (both digital and mixed media) based on how this industry and its periphery has effectively damaged people and the communityas a whole, but was warned off of finishing it. Seeing some of the work in progress before it was scrapped changed some people, though some for better AND some for worse.
Wouldn't have changed the industry, but might have helped individual people see it differently enough to change for the better. Never know.
I agree.
I have no problem with prostitution as long as both parties are consenting and of legal age. Regulations to test for STDs would be a must.
Mandatory condom use would be strongly advised.
I fully support this as long as there us a way for an adult to disable the device filters, similar to the way I can disable parental controls on my Xbox, Roku, etc.
It should work the same way. As you said, it already works for several other high traffic devices.
Regulations to test for stds and mandatory condom use during sex is definitely as libertarian as the US getting involved in needless foreign wars it has no business being involved in.
Did I say that? I said prostitution should be legal. And I was talking about him saying it should be legal. Condoms and all that? Nah, up to the person. If a person wants to risk their health. Thats between them and them.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
I'd like to ask for prayers again. **UPDATE**- Latest: St.PatterSoN-54-
-
