Isn't it against the rules to derail threads and shit them up with off-topic trolling? I mean, even if it's not, it's just kinda pathetic that your porn addled brain is too full of holes to even try to articulate a coherent argument for the benefits of pornography for society.
once every few days i choose to get off to relax or fall asleep faster and when i do, it's more fun if i'm looking at big tits. it's pretty much that simple.
That's great but not compelling.
Wow I wonder why you're so mad suddenly? Is that like how you're mad at KF and signed up at the place that shits on KF with the same user name and avatar? lol
why not? you said come up with an argument for its utility. i explained to you the utility it provides in my life; now multiply that out by the millions of people that probably have the same experience with it, and you have the societal utility you asked for.
Which is fine according to you, and should be allowed, because, after all, the "subjective moral argument" against it is insufficient. We can't possibly ban transgenderism, it's what our military fought and died for!
Weighing the pros and cons of something is literally what intelligent people do. If something is bad for society (has little to no utility, and it's outweighed by the negatives) then a wise people will simply ban it.
Porn is entertainment. What is a subjective moral argument for entertainment? Can you even answer that? And what the fuck is a argument for the utility of entertainment? It's entertainment. Its utility is obvious, you dope. It doesn't need to do anything else.
I really don't remember you being this stupid. What happened to you? lol Do you realize how retarded this argument sounds when applied to literally anything else. What are the pros and cons of horror movies? What are the pros and cons of violent video games? What are the pros and cons of ice cream? How fucking broken is your brain right now?
"It's entertainment" isn't some rock-solid defense LOL. We have obscenity laws, they just need to be better enforced and expanded. Coomers can cope and seethe.
Funny, I was thinking the same about you, we agreed on a couple things and I forgot you're essentially a lolbertarian.
Things being liked in and of themselves is absolutely a reason for legality. It is not determinative in and of itself, but it is certainly a factor that is part of the balance. If you don't understand that, you are disconnected from the human experience.
I'm actually slightly surprised to see you rallying to defend ice cream, based on your other takes. If you had to balance the pros and cons of ice cream (or junk food in general) what would you look at and why would you come down in support of ice cream?
I covered this earlier in the thread, OnionFarms_Ness. Juries refuse to convict anyone of obscenity for porn in the past 30 years or more. It's not obscene. You don't know how obscenity works apparently. It's determined in a fucking court room, and since there's never going to be 12 OnionFarms_Nesses in there, there will never be a conviction. This line of thinking is dead. It's free speech.
You scoffed at the idea of "freedom." You live in some LARP where the US constitution doesn't exist, and I don't care to feed into your paranoid delusions.
I like how you just shoved drugs in there randomly for no reason, because everyone knows how fucking harmless porn is on its own, even you do deep down with this routine. Hilarious stuff. You've gone batshit crazy.
It is obscene regardless of what juries do. It's also not free speech, otherwise you could exercise it anywhere, anytime. Exercise your version of "free speech" around kids, see how that goes (well, probably just fine these days).
I scoff at your warped notion of freedom. Free speech isn't absolute, I'm already arguing on the Onion Farms you keep bringing up with another retard who thinks like you, and to your credit, you're at least a bit more entertaining and competent.
If it's harmless then you're saying that people who trooned out because of pornography aren't harmed, for example. You're really defending transgenderism today, earlier you dodged the subject too... I guess that's not surprising from an LGBTBBQ+ persxn.
Ice cream doesn't lead to higher cholesterol or weight gain. Eating buckets of it every day does, but by that logic drinking water kills you. Stop playing stupid. Do you really love porn so much that you'll look like a lying retard just to defend it?
None of what you said in this excerpt is an accurate statement of American constitutional law, brother.
This argument does not suggest what you think it does. It is absolutely fatal to your position on porn.
No it's not. People can and do like all sorts of bad things, "the human experience" included people liking rape and slavery for much of our existence. Sorry, it doesn't matter one bit if we like something or not, if it's bad we should ban it, period.
Ice cream is harmless, it's literally just the cream from a cow with sugar. There's things I think should certainly be banned like HFCS and certain marketing practices, but there's literally nothing wrong with ice cream in and of itself, and I can't see any kind of reasonable position against it.
The obesity epidemic is a complicated topic far outside the scope of this issue, but to touch on it, there's no one single food which is a problem (though there may indeed be certain problematic foods), it's largely a cultural issue (and a corporate one). Food isn't the problem.
I don't agree, but honestly, don't even care. The Constitution is less important than what's correct. The Constitution was great in sane times, but is insufficient in keeping madness at bay in current year.
I can see why you'd think so at a glance, but you're wrong.
Obscenity is determined by "community standards" which is determined by the jury. They tried convicting people over obscenity for porn, and they won't convict. It's not obscene. The juries are the one that determines that. What they do does matter, because they're the ones that make this determination.
Ahh, gotta go to that retarded strawman again. Can't argue anything regarding what adults do, so gotta bring the kids into it as a last ditched effort. This is weak. This has nothing to do with what we are talking about. We are talking about adults viewing images and videos of other adults.
Mine is based on the US constitution. You're the one with thinking warped by mental illness or whatever else your problem is. Scoffing at freedom, though, wow what a hard ass you are.
The exceptions are extremely narrow, and adult pornography clearly doesn't fall into them. You're talking like a Canadian now that thinks things like hate speech can be illegal.
You're the one who signed up there. I just think your lack of OpSec is hilarious.
The idea that porn causes troonery is ridiculous. You sound like the /pol/ transplant that tried arguing that anime causes it. It's caused by gender dysphoria perhaps, but porn? Give me a break. I've never defended troons here. Anyone can check that my post history on that, my opinions on them are pretty clear. I'm not dodging anything, you are trying to change the subject.
Similarly, most well adjusted adults look at porn in moderation and have no problem. Thanks for making my argument for me.
It's also the same argument behind environmentalist shit like carbon taxes, outlawing meat, as well as gun control, and outlawing certain kinds of political speech. But somehow it's "different" when it's any of those, or even ice cream.
Have you seen "community standards" lately?
You're talking about free speech. It sure doesn't seem like free speech if you can't exercise it in the public square...
But the exceptions do exist, and so there's precedent. You aren't doing a good job arguing against me so maybe we should go with my ideas.
I didn't bother putting much effort into hiding myself online, and I've come to like this username, I was never really too attached to previous ones.
I'm too lazy to cite examples but there's self-reported cases, including high-profile individuals. Similarly, there's an article in A&N about guys getting sucked into faggotry through porn exposure, which I'd consider a type of harm. There's also the likelihood of lollicon hentai
You're welcome.
You don't have to agree; you're still wrong. Prevailing (i.e. binding) interpretations of constitutional law don't depend on whether you agree with them.
"Community standards" is a term of art referring to one of the three prongs of the Miller test, which is a mandatory test to determine what is or isn't "obscenity" under American law. The first two prongs of the Miller test are explicitly and exclusively left to the jury as questions of fact, which is why I said you were wrong to claim that something can be "obscene regardless of what juries do."
That's not how legal precedent works. There are exceptions in the precedent, but they are already defined and narrowly construed and are not applied to your bog standard pornography on the internet. Just because exceptions exist doesn't mean you can then expand those exceptions however you see fit without a basis under the Constitution.
You're advocating for the upheaval of the Constitution, i.e. a full revolution, end of the United States, and subsequent replacement with a new country. It's hard to lend weight to your argument for constitutional overhaul when you don't have that deep of a grasp on constitutional law as it already exists. That's not an insult; American constitutional law is not something easily understood by a layperson without years of training and study.
This has been the case with the community standards in obscenity cases for many decades. What are you, 80? lol This cow has left the barn. I suggest putting on a VR helmet and then you can pretend it's 1950 when the Hays Code still existed. That's the only way you're going to ever make this LARP real.
This coming form the guy who randomly introduced, let me count: drugs, children and troons into the debate, trying to redirect it down some autsitic rabbit hole, because you aren't good at this anymore. You're so wrong, you're literally having little fits that I'm actually citing case law and then go, "Nope, my opinion as OnionFarms_Ness trumps the courts." Wrong. lol
Trying to build a rep across different websites with the same user name, avatar, etc. is lolcow behavior. I haven't done anything approaching that since probably 12 years ago. But it will make you easy to track down I guess if you ever end up with a thread here.
The idea anyone was made gay or into a troon from watching porn is bullshit. It can be an outlet for someone's sexual inclinations, but the suggestion it causes them is completely ridiculous. If this is the newest theory out of /pol/, it's because those people were male fags to begin with and have been for almost ever. This is "violent video games cause mass shootings" tier garbage.
Glad you're admitting banning harmless things for the "greater good" is asinine libtard nanny state behavior. I wonder why I never hear about the families and sexual partners of people who make these arguments. This is why nothing would change for you even if you had your way. You and the other horse shoe liberals in this thread would still be mad at society and still be naming scapegoat windmills to go crusade against.
I'm going to preface this by saying I like the idea of fucking dogs...
