i will edit it out for you
Sadly most people only care about free speech to the extent that it impacts them as long as they can say what they like and buy the art they like every one can go hang as far as they care. Most people fundamentally have a fuck you got mine attitude about it.
I was about to go to sleep. But then suddenly it occurred to me…
I'll take your word for it, but I cannot say that I have noticed. I'd say that usually those three categories have a combo of issues they go ham on - usually that exact combination, funny enough.
That's what I'm saying; the problem here is that in this specific kind of topic the tendency is extremely prominent.
The miller test describes 90% of porn on the internet, i'm willing to start with that. The only way to say it doesn't is if you're being incredibly dishonest.
If you want to speak you have to physically fight for the speaking stick. This is how society should work, the right of strength rules all!
Yes we know you're 13 please stop making it our problem.
Check out the Lolicon/Shotacon Defenders thread sometime in Community Watch. It's an easy defense.
This whole "You're either with us or with the gooners" bullshit is just as disingenuous as George W. saying "You're either with us or with the terrorists!"
How about you just ban prostitution, and classify pornography as evidence of prostitution, instead of wandering into the freedom of speech argument?
The Porno Yuga is no joke, sir. It will return.
The same bill in the UK which caused Null to block the site to UK users is the same bill that is making porn sites implement an obligatory proof of age check on the 27th of July (you might have to show valid ID, like a passport or whatnot, which is then stored on the site). I think the people who are defending porn aren't necessarily doing it because they don't want to cease their cooming, but because the government that'd pass such a bill would probably bundle with it other restrictions that are more objectionable. The whole "slippery slope" argument keeping switching from fallacy to legitimate depending on the phases of the moon but I think the UK is a recent-ish precedent of a government doing something to "protect children" that also gets coupled with a bunch of other unsavoury shit.
Also most of the issues raised here have little to do with porn or even caring about porn, it's the fundamental reality that governments do not give up power and abuse the power they're given. Every time other governments across the world have instituted similar measures it always devolves into broad, unregulated censorship. Every single time. So all these smug retards will get to enjoy their porn ban for a couple of years before this website (and all the other fun websites they enjoy) get blocked by similar measures.
The legislation is the only reason we're even debating the idea. No reasonable person, and certainly no one here, is arguing that minors should have unfettered access to pornography. The question is balancing that concern with the right of responsible adults not to have the government up their arse.
It's incredibly subjective. The Miller Test hinges on community standards i.e what a reasonable person in the community might find offensive. The trouble with internet porn is that what one person in one community might find offensive, another person in another community might not. What someone in Utah might find offensive is not what someone in California might find offensive
I object to this characterization. I think some do understand the concern, they just do not find it compelling enough.
I understand your concern and I see where you’re coming from. If you can’t accept the ID for access do you have a better solution for the problem or are you of the mind that this isn’t something that should be regulated at all?
