Should we ban pornography?

[Zanera]

FOR THOSE ASKING FOR A "SOURCE" FOR MY STATEMENTS --- SOURCE ONE AND SOURCE TWO

I'm sure you cant get Ajit Pai on this.

Ajit Pai is a great man. I hope with Net Neutrality repealed the scaremongering scenarios of people having to pay extra for porn happen.

Even Oceania from George Orwell's 1984, literally the world's worst Dystopia, did not ban porn.

Wrong, and even then Oceania wasn't authoritarian enough.

I leave the house quite often and I watch porn 6 to 5 times a week I think

Addict-in-denial. You should stop, it's not good for your health.

You wanna prohibit video games and porn? Forget the argument of how prohibition didn't work, you're gonna start a riot

Nope. I want to prohibit: Porn, Alcohol, Drugs, Fornication, and Atheist & Liberal thought. If you get addicted to video games it's not the fault of the game, but something wrong with you as the person. For example, I was only "addicted" (and I use that term lightly) when I had depression. When I got over that, I rarely played them outside of when I was sick or there was nothing else to do.

>ultra-authoritarian fictional regime wasn't ultra-authoritarian enough
>prohibit complex webs of thought
>being addicted to video games means there's something physically/mentally wrong with you

I think I've officially stopped taking this thread seriously.
Or the OP.
Ever.

[The Batavia]

How? It's like the same damn thing. The only diffrence is instead of two dicks there are two vaginas. Just because the risks of STD are lower doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I'm one of the few poeple that doesn't like lesbian stuff so that is why I'm bringing it up.

Eh, whether I prefer lesbianism to the plain straight stuff seems to depend on what mood I'm in. No, I haven't consciously figured out how.

But no, you do not have to be "gender-neutral" about this when the implications of one form of homosexuality are different from those of another. A ban on gay porn wouldn't be "gender-neutral" anyway, as you're still treating the sexes of the people involved as relevant.

Unless the idea is to ban portrayal of every sex act except vaginal intercourse, in which case you're banning a pretty big chunk of straight porn as well. Personally, I'd find it convenient as I wouldn't have to scroll past all that anal sex to get to the vaginal stuff, but somebody might've wanted to see the former, and convenience isn't really a good reason for censorship either.

I do treat it gender-neutral myself, because I believe in actual gender equality. And no, I didn't mean the ban on vaginal intercourse. I also never said I wanted to censor lesbian porn because that would upset alot of people.

[The Batavia]

FOR THOSE ASKING FOR A "SOURCE" FOR MY STATEMENTS --- SOURCE ONE AND SOURCE TWO


Ajit Pai is a great man. I hope with Net Neutrality repealed the scaremongering scenarios of people having to pay extra for porn happen.


Wrong, and even then Oceania wasn't authoritarian enough.


Addict-in-denial. You should stop, it's not good for your health.


Nope. I want to prohibit: Porn, Alcohol, Drugs, Fornication, and Atheist & Liberal thought. If you get addicted to video games it's not the fault of the game, but something wrong with you as the person. For example, I was only "addicted" (and I use that term lightly) when I had depression. When I got over that, I rarely played them outside of when I was sick or there was nothing else to do.

>ultra-authoritarian fictional regime wasn't ultra-authoritarian enough
>prohibit complex webs of thought
>being addicted to video games means there's something physically/mentally wrong with you

I think I've officially stopped taking this thread seriously.
Or the OP.
Ever.

Tbh I can't believe people like the OP even exist.

[The New California Republic]

So you don't believe in the first amendment?

If your signature is genuine, what an absolute waste of your service to immediately betray it as soon as you get home.

I am a muslim first.

But the point is that not everybody else is. So to force Islamic morality on everyone else by banning pornography would be nonsensical and unjustifiable.

[Kennlind]

Ajit Pai is a great man. I hope with Net Neutrality repealed the scaremongering scenarios of people having to pay extra for porn happen.

Ignoring your garbage sources, no people won't have to pay for porn. They didn't have to pay for porn pre-2013 so they wouldn't do it now. Besides it's not that much to pay for porn. I only pay about $50 a month for two sites.

Wrong, and even then Oceania wasn't authoritarian enough.

Well ok then...

Addict-in-denial. You should stop, it's not good for your health.

Not an addict. And no I'm not going to stop watching porn and my health is fine

Nope. I want to prohibit: Porn, Alcohol, Drugs, Fornication, and Atheist & Liberal thought. If you get addicted to video games it's not the fault of the game, but something wrong with you as the person.

Oh joy the thought police is here.

For example, I was only "addicted" (and I use that term lightly) when I had depression. When I got over that, I rarely played them outside of when I was sick or there was nothing else to do.

Um you can't get over depression. Trust me

I beg to disagree. Maybe for you lot who let the doctors hook you up on drugs, God saved me after I chose not to take any.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Addict-in-denial. You should stop, it's not good for your health.

Any basis for this statement? At all?

[Xelsis]

I'm a USian, so I say leave it to the individual states. Not something the Federal government should legislate.

First Amendment, though.

Covering pornography under the First Amendment really requires a quite vigorous stretching of the language in a way that would never be applied everywhere else (certainly not for the Amendment which follows it).

[The Parkus Empire]

I am a muslim first.

But the point is that not everybody else is. So to force Islamic morality on everyone else by banning pornography would be nonsensical and unjustifiable.

If you say there is no transcendent morality, then you cannot say there is anything morally wrong about forcing your morality on others, except to the extent that you mean you personally dislike it.

[Topoliani]

I think I've officially stopped taking this thread seriously.
Or the OP.
Ever.

Most people did a LONG time ago

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

I am a muslim first.

But the point is that not everybody else is. So to force Islamic morality on everyone else by banning pornography would be nonsensical and unjustifiable.

Yeah. This.

One needs to accept that the first amendment is the law of the land. If you interpret the Qur'an as telling you to violate it, the problem is with either yourself or the Qur'an. Not the first amendment.

Adorable avatar, though, Aillyria!

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Eh, whether I prefer lesbianism to the plain straight stuff seems to depend on what mood I'm in. No, I haven't consciously figured out how.

But no, you do not have to be "gender-neutral" about this when the implications of one form of homosexuality are different from those of another. A ban on gay porn wouldn't be "gender-neutral" anyway, as you're still treating the sexes of the people involved as relevant.

Unless the idea is to ban portrayal of every sex act except vaginal intercourse, in which case you're banning a pretty big chunk of straight porn as well. Personally, I'd find it convenient as I wouldn't have to scroll past all that anal sex to get to the vaginal stuff, but somebody might've wanted to see the former, and convenience isn't really a good reason for censorship either.

I do treat it gender-neutral myself, because I believe in actual gender equality. And no, I didn't mean the ban on vaginal intercourse. I also never said I wanted to censor lesbian porn because that would upset alot of people.

I said ban on everything except vaginal.

The point remains that it cannot be "gender-neutral" anyway.

[Zanera]

>ultra-authoritarian fictional regime wasn't ultra-authoritarian enough
>prohibit complex webs of thought
>being addicted to video games means there's something physically/mentally wrong with you

I think I've officially stopped taking this thread seriously.
Or the OP.
Ever.

Tbh I can't believe people like the OP even exist.

People that want theocratic ultra-hellholes?
Apparently so.

[Free Missouri]

The Internet isn't infallible, in many countries all pornsites and links are blocked.

Why ban it? Are you serious? It aides it the continued sexualization and objectification of people in society. Pornography is also basically a type of prostitution.

So you don't believe in the first amendment?

If your signature is genuine, what an absolute waste of your service to immediately betray it as soon as you get home.

Pornography isn’t covered by the Bill of Rights.

See Miller v. California, Roth v. US, and Jacobellis v. Ohio

[Petrolheadia]

But the point is that not everybody else is. So to force Islamic morality on everyone else by banning pornography would be nonsensical and unjustifiable.

If you say there is no transcendent morality, then you cannot say there is anything morally wrong about forcing your morality on others, except to the extent that you mean you personally dislike it.

Yeah, but there is something logically wrong. It's not logical to ban something "because my God says so".

[Petrolheadia]

I do treat it gender-neutral myself, because I believe in actual gender equality. And no, I didn't mean the ban on vaginal intercourse. I also never said I wanted to censor lesbian porn because that would upset alot of people.

I said ban on everything except vaginal.

The point remains that it cannot be "gender-neutral" anyway.

Have fun explaining your point to lesbians.

I know one, I can give you her number to have you explain your views to her.

[The Batavia]

I do treat it gender-neutral myself, because I believe in actual gender equality. And no, I didn't mean the ban on vaginal intercourse. I also never said I wanted to censor lesbian porn because that would upset alot of people.

I said ban on everything except vaginal.

The point remains that it cannot be "gender-neutral" anyway.

Oh, I must've misread it. Anyways, I never said that I wanted to ban lesbian porn in the first place, if that is your thing, than I wont stop you,

[The Parkus Empire]

If you say there is no transcendent morality, then you cannot say there is anything morally wrong about forcing your morality on others, except to the extent that you mean you personally dislike it.

Yeah, but there is something logically wrong. It's not logical to ban something "because my God says so".

Values do not need to be justified by logic, and at their root they cannot be.

[The Slytherin]

No, but its production should be highly regulated.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

So you don't believe in the first amendment?

If your signature is genuine, what an absolute waste of your service to immediately betray it as soon as you get home.

Pornography isn’t covered by the Bill of Rights.

See Miller v. California, Roth v. US, and Jacobellis v. Ohio

All mental gymnastics. The whole point of freedom of speech is that allowing governments to censor content gives them too much power.

[The Batavia]

I said ban on everything except vaginal.

The point remains that it cannot be "gender-neutral" anyway.

Have fun explaining your point to lesbians.

I know one, I can give you her number to have you explain your views to her.

Like I said before (and I hate to repeat myself), I do not want to ban lesbian porn.

[Aillyria]

I am a muslim first.

But the point is that not everybody else is. So to force Islamic morality on everyone else by banning pornography would be nonsensical and unjustifiable.

Abrahamic morality is superior to "moral relativism".

If you say there is no transcendent morality, then you cannot say there is anything morally wrong about forcing your morality on others, except to the extent that you mean you personally dislike it.

Yeah, but there is something logically wrong. It's not logical to ban something "because my God says so".

It is if you don't want to go to Hell.

[The New California Republic]

If you say there is no transcendent morality, then you cannot say there is anything morally wrong about forcing your morality on others, except to the extent that you mean you personally dislike it.

Yeah, but there is something logically wrong. It's not logical to ban something "because my God says so".

^Yeah, this. It is wrong in a logical sense.

[The Parkus Empire]

No, but it’s production should be highly regulated.

That would be pretty expensive.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

No, but it’s production should be highly regulated.

1. Surely you meant to say "its."

2. Define "its production."

[Kennlind]

Wrong, and even then Oceania wasn't authoritarian enough.

I'm wondering if I should report trolling, or if it's Poe's law.

You know what they say, never trust an inoffensive centrist democracy.[/quote]
I wasn't being serious.

Addict-in-denial. You should stop, it's not good for your health.

Any basis for this statement? At all?

I've dealt with addicts - drug addicts, alcoholics, porn addicts, they all say the same stuff.

Nope. I want to prohibit: Porn, Alcohol, Drugs, Fornication, and Atheist & Liberal thought.

Good luck banning those things! Because I am oh so sure, that liberals, atheists(Including me), religious people who drink alcohol for ceremonies(Most religious aside from Islam), the Healthcare system(And if you allow only them to use drugs, then #LegalizeIt people), and many more will absolutely not support your radical and orwellian ideas!

If I ran for office and an atheist, a liberal, an alcoholic or porn addict voted for me I would never take my elected position. I would resign immediately.

Just think of the children.

Liberals don't care about children.

I'm a USian, so I say leave it to the individual states. Not something the Federal government should legislate.

Better than nothing I suppose.