There's no reason for it not to stay limited to porn sites. If the government wanted to pass legislation impeding free access to the Internet they already would have regardless of whether there's an ID requirement for porn websites or not. We have already seen the government pass or try to pass radical legislation without the need for prerequisites.
I mean... that would certainly explain your weirdly narrow attitude. No. I'm not, and I don't think anyone else is, defending porn sites. I'm defending any website's anonymity, including this one, should this legislation pass because it seeks to cast any website where "obscene" materials are available, behind an ID wall. And what is considered "obscene" will be updated to today's standards of whoever is in charge on capitol hill.
I thought I was genius for figuring this out because I told everyone I knew and no one had the thought to do it but I guess I'm not that smart.
I think Dr.J is saying that the government requiring ID for anything accessed at your home is an encroachment to your privacy. Like if suddenly they said "All Rated M game purchases online had to show proof of ID" it'd be a different tune. I get that porn is abhorrent but giving the government the ability to say "You need an ID to access this website" gives them a lot of power to abuse.
Yeah but don't you get it, the government has never expanded the reach of its power or abused its power in all of human history so it's literally impossible that this oversight will extend beyond porn to tracking everything you say and do online (something authoritarians are very loud about wanting to do) so it's fine.
Because that wouldn't pass.
A bill to ban/monitor porn sites could pass. Then it would be expanded upon to include all manner of sites the government doesn't like. Which is what always happens.
I said it last night and I'll say it again. I am profoundly amused that there's vocal support on this site for the government to build the framework and flagship effort to begin setting up ID checkpoints on the internet. It's like everything that's happened in the last 5 years doesn't matter, and everything that happened in the last 50 years is just "Meh... we'll be better" hand waived.
Uh, yes it is. It's my right to look at whatever I fucking please, so long as it's not illegal, which most pornography is not
They shouldn't have that fucking data in the first place.
a bill to cut your dick off could also be passed and then you'd be super fucked
There was no reason for debanking to be used for anything short of suspected terrorism but here we are. There is no reason for a surveillance state tool use against citizens yet here we are. If something can be abused it will be abused. Often times abused in ways you could have never even thought of.
People who say things like this really don't understand that the government loves to abuse even the smallest amount of power given to them. They are the definition of "Give an inch take a mile"
IQ AND melanin test.
White people are banned from using the internet then.
not as weird as that after seeing literally any tranny lolcow you are not against porn entirely
Most people here from what I've seen are against porn, but also it's easier to deal with porn on your own and prevent your kids from accessing it than giving the government more power that they don't need.
no actually it's really hard to do that
I'm way more worried about drugs than sex for the most part, but whatever. I just find the slippery slope of having too much tracking to be worse than any benefits.
