Arizona Denounces Pornography as Public Health Crisis

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

Read the link only one did, and stop passing the buck to save face. This is a conservative Republican issue thru and thru.

Arizona democrats maybe, but I can assure that elsewhere, democrats would support this.

Have a significant percentage (let's say 25%) of Democrats in other states proposed or supported legislation like this?

[The Great-German Empire]

Okay, just my thoughts.

Porn isn't harmless, that much is true - especially among younger people whose views on intimate relationships might be warped by it. It is a strong external stimulus that has the potential to change the way one thinks and feels in situations where intimacy is involved or even just mentioned. With that said, however, it's just photography, video clips and artwork. It's hardly even a physical commodity now that the Internet is a thing. The process of shooting/drawing pornography typically consists of several separate and entirely legal acts (And those that are illegal are prosecuted already, anyway) and distributed to be consumed through looking at it - by that description, we're already deep into freedom of expression territory. The OP's comparison with drugs doesn't take notice of the fact that drugs are a physical commodity with invariable mental effects on the consumer that are dangerous not just to their mindset like porn is, but often to the very functioning of the brain (marijuana) and the body (harder stuff). The OP's assertion that the demand for porn would be irrelevant in a non-market economy also falls flat, because where official markets are absent, unofficial ones appear. In this case the drug comparison is actually completely fair: Trafficking of illegal commodities currently props up organized crime and causes death all around it. In short, limiting or banning pornography is too difficult to enforce and causes too many constitutional rights conflicts to be worth it.

[Cekoviu]

I’m rubbing my temple right now. Jesus.

That’s not how you masturbate.

Depends on the species.

[Cekoviu]

Read the link only one did, and stop passing the buck to save face. This is a conservative Republican issue thru and thru.

Arizona democrats maybe, but I can assure that elsewhere, democrats would support this.

Democrat elsewhere. Don't support it.
Maybe don't pull stuff out of your ass?

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Just someones bid to win over the relgous voteing crowd by saying something stupid.

[Thermodolia]

Arizona democrats maybe, but I can assure that elsewhere, democrats would support this.

Have a significant percentage (let's say 25%) of Democrats in other states proposed or supported legislation like this?

There’s about a handful of conservative Democrats left so no

[Thermodolia]

Arizona democrats maybe, but I can assure that elsewhere, democrats would support this.

Democrat elsewhere. Don't support it.
Maybe don't pull stuff out of your ass?

There are a few democrats in my state that would absolutely love this. Granted they are a dying breed so they won’t exactly matter in a few years

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

Have a significant percentage (let's say 25%) of Democrats in other states proposed or supported legislation like this?

There’s about a handful of conservative Democrats left so no

Well there you go. Democrats aren't a hive mind, there will always be outliers with all but the most extreme issues, so you can't say that none of them would support (or oppose) it. However, if you make a sweeping generalization (which is what that seemed to be - technically, it could simply be saying that the number of out of state Democrats who support it is >1, but that statement is meaningless), it needs to be true for a fairly large percentage of the demographic. 1 in 4 seems to be a reasonable minimum.

[Hammer Britannia]

Now Normies know what it feels like to live in a society.

Now Normies know what it's like to be a Gamer and have everything you love decreed evil by the State. Gamers rise up

[Thermodolia]

Okay, just my thoughts.

Porn isn't harmless, that much is true -

That’s where your wrong buddy

especially among younger people whose views on intimate relationships might be warped by it.

The only thing porn warps is expectations of sex and that’s it. And that’s not a given either

It is a strong external stimulus that has the potential to change the way one thinks and feels in situations where intimacy is involved or even just mentioned.

Um no.

With that said, however, it's just photography, video clips and artwork. It's hardly even a physical commodity now that the Internet is a thing. The process of shooting/drawing pornography typically consists of several separate and entirely legal acts (And those that are illegal are prosecuted already, anyway) and distributed to be consumed through looking at it - by that description, we're already deep into freedom of expression territory.

Porn is still quite physical. Pun not intended.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Why is this the state's problem?

Seriously. Even if pornography were to unambiguously harm the people consuming it, which is not true, then it would be up to the people and not the state to keep themselves away. Look to US laws on cigarettes for the kind of legislation that would likely be appropriate around pornography.

The difference is that with porn, as long as it is legal, it is impossible to regulate access too, and impossible regulate the marketing of.

[Cekoviu]

Seriously. Even if pornography were to unambiguously harm the people consuming it, which is not true, then it would be up to the people and not the state to keep themselves away. Look to US laws on cigarettes for the kind of legislation that would likely be appropriate around pornography.

The difference is that with porn, as long as it is legal, it is impossible to regulate access too, and impossible regulate the marketing of.

Access to it shouldn't be regulated, except where it's illegal, which most functioning governments already do (along with community policing).

[United Muscovite Nations]

The difference is that with porn, as long as it is legal, it is impossible to regulate access too, and impossible regulate the marketing of.

Access to it shouldn't be regulated, except where it's illegal, which most functioning governments already do (along with community policing).

I don't think we should allow children to have access to it.

[Conserative Morality]

Seriously. Even if pornography were to unambiguously harm the people consuming it, which is not true, then it would be up to the people and not the state to keep themselves away. Look to US laws on cigarettes for the kind of legislation that would likely be appropriate around pornography.

The difference is that with porn, as long as it is legal, it is impossible to regulate access too, and impossible regulate the marketing of.

You can only regulate things that are illegal?

Here I thought it was the other way around.

[Cekoviu]

Access to it shouldn't be regulated, except where it's illegal, which most functioning governments already do (along with community policing).

I don't think we should allow children to have access to it.

Absolutely, but there's really nothing we can do about that apart from requiring a "over 18" button when accessed and not allowing advertisement in material targeted towards children. Again, already the case. It's really the parents' job to make sure young children's internet access is regulated.

[Aclion]

Access to it shouldn't be regulated, except where it's illegal, which most functioning governments already do (along with community policing).

I don't think we should allow children to have access to it.

Good luck. I know they didn't stop me.

[Thermodolia]

Access to it shouldn't be regulated, except where it's illegal, which most functioning governments already do (along with community policing).

I don't think we should allow children to have access to it.

We don’t. Not legally. However with how technologically savvy many children are these features which are supposed to keep children from viewing porn are circumvented by the children in question.

A lot of porn sites have either a button you click on that says your above the age of 18 or have a menu where you have to select your age by birth year. It’s not hard to subtract 18 or 19 years from the current date

[Hammer Britannia]

The difference is that with porn, as long as it is legal, it is impossible to regulate access too, and impossible regulate the marketing of.

You can only regulate things that are illegal?

Here I thought it was the other way around.

Just look at Heroin

In 1980, 1 milligram of Heroin costs around $5. In the Early 2000s, it cost only $.40. Not to mention the stuff has only gotten stronger, more potent, and more dangerous the years. Sure, it was already illegal, but when we tried to control the flow we only made the problem worse.

[Cekoviu]

I don't think we should allow children to have access to it.

We don’t. Not legally. However with how technologically savvy many children are these features which are supposed to keep children from viewing porn are circumvented by the children in question.

A lot of porn sites have either a button you click on that says your above the age of 18 or have a menu where you have to select your age by birth year. It’s not hard to subtract 18 or 19 years from the current date

Yeah. There are extensions and more static electronics that police children's internet use so they can't access porn, gore, political propaganda, social media, etc., but the porn sites can't do anything about keeping minors off apart from that.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I don't think we should allow children to have access to it.

Absolutely, but there's really nothing we can do about that apart from requiring a "over 18" button when accessed and not allowing advertisement in material targeted towards children. Again, already the case. It's really the parents' job to make sure young children's internet access is regulated.

The impossibility in regulating that access is precisely why I said it should be banned.

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

I don't think we should allow children to have access to it.

We don’t. Not legally. However with how technologically savvy many children are these features which are supposed to keep children from viewing porn are circumvented by the children in question.

A lot of porn sites have either a button you click on that says your above the age of 18 or have a menu where you have to select your age by birth year. It’s not hard to subtract 18 or 19 years from the current date

I don't think that there should be legislation against it, but I must acknowledge that it's difficult for parents to regulate their child's technology when the child is more tech-savvy than they are.

[A Town]

You wanna look at your porno? Well I gots the big sorno. You're gonna mourno

When I come along cos' I'm gonna make it hot like a journo

[Conserative Morality]

Absolutely, but there's really nothing we can do about that apart from requiring a "over 18" button when accessed and not allowing advertisement in material targeted towards children. Again, already the case. It's really the parents' job to make sure young children's internet access is regulated.

The impossibility in regulating that access is precisely why I said it should be banned.

Why don't you take a look at the kind of countries that ban porn, and get back to us regarding the efficacy of the bans and their effects on consumptive habits.

It's not pretty.

[Cekoviu]

Absolutely, but there's really nothing we can do about that apart from requiring a "over 18" button when accessed and not allowing advertisement in material targeted towards children. Again, already the case. It's really the parents' job to make sure young children's internet access is regulated.

The impossibility in regulating that access is precisely why I said it should be banned.

Then tech-savvy minors will just use VPNs and Tor to access it and it can't be properly regulated. Exactly like HB said with heroin, it will become more and more common with less regulation.

[Cekoviu]

The impossibility in regulating that access is precisely why I said it should be banned.

Why don't you take a look at the kind of countries that ban porn, and get back to us regarding the efficacy of the bans and their effects on consumptive habits.

It's not pretty.

Fun fact: a disproportionate number of Tor users live in Iran thanks to their internet bans on social media and pornography.