Acoalition of commercial pornographers, styling themselves as the “Free Speech Coalition,” is asserting that Texas is threatening their First Amendment liberties by making them legally responsible for verifying the age of viewers who use their websites.
Anyone operating with a vestige of a moral compass, however, should sense something farcical in the pornographers’ preening efforts to claim the moral high ground. Yet given the state of precedent, they have reason to expect the Supreme Court to side with them and prevent Texas from enforcing a law to stop porn from flooding into children’s minds.
I doubt that the Founding Fathers envisioned unhinged women taking five black cocks in their ass as protected speech under the First Amendment…
ReplyDeleteYup, they definitely would have drawn the line at four, possibly three.
DeleteEd
Winner of the internet today!
DeleteYou might consider reading a bit more history. Most of the founding fathers have mixed descendents.
DeleteIt’s odd how when someone disagrees with my arguments, they assume that I’m uneducated on the topic. My bookshelf is quite full of histories that I’ve read.
DeleteThey already have that box to check where you say your 18. What more does Texas need? I can't imagine a 15 year old boy checking that box on purpose.
ReplyDeleteThis is not a free speech issue no matter what the Supreme Court rules... As a consumer if I want to buy alcohol or cigarettes and look close to being 21 or in some places no matter what your age you have to present ID to purchase... I'm not anti-porn but it's just not a subject that should be available everywhere for everyone to have access to
ReplyDeleteJD
Funny how the left is anti-porn to protect women's feelings, but is pro-porn when it comes to kids.
ReplyDeleteThe solution is simple:
ReplyDeletePunitively TAX every image broadcast and received.
That’s it.
50$ to send a dick pic, and 50$ to RECIEVE IT.
1000$ to broadcast a porn film, 1000$ to stream. downloads 10,000$ (for EVERY INSTANCE.)
Yes.
We know when you view and how much you view, we photograph YOU your entire viewing time.
We know everything already. Expect a BILL.
The first year we will rake in trillions, the second year zero.
Your pal
Scott.
Great idea!
DeleteAnd then when Democrats get back in power they can point to this as a pathways to make guns and ammunition unaffordable. They don't need to make guns illegal, they just have to apply punitive taxes every bullet to make them $1000 a piece!
At some point the pendulum will swing back the other way.
The $ comes before the amount. $40; not 40$.
DeleteHedgeless Horseman over at Zerohedge had brought this up a few years ago. Not as far fetched as you'd think given all the other shiite we've seen soon far.
DeleteHedgeless Horseman over at Zerohedge brought this up a few years ago. Don't think someone something akin to this isn't in their sights.
DeleteHave all the guns you want. Want a cartridge That's $ 10. Each for .22
Given all the other shiite ideas they've come to propose, this wouldn't be too far off.
That's what they did with the NFA $200 tax stamp for machine guns and silencers. $200 in 1934 = $2700 today. They did it as a tax because they knew that a prohibition would be unconstitutional.
DeleteInstead of debating the porn angle. People need to be educated enough to understand that America and our system of representation was designed to govern a civil and moral people. Our system is completely inadequate to govern current democrats and or their democracy. .
ReplyDeleteWhile our system certainly works better with a moral and righteous people, what system works for immoral and evil people like today's Democrats?
DeleteI read somewhere that more laws are created in a year than was created in the first 100 years of our country. Back then, those that made the regulations and laws were among the people. They went to the same pubs, lived in the same neighborhoods, and if they did something We The People didn't like, they heard about it. And if they did not change their ways, a bit of tar and feathers made the public's opinion on the matter a bit clearer.
DeleteNow, we have either faceless and nameless bureaucrats doing the job and answer to no one. The few that we do know, are almost sequestered from the public as they hide in their restricted offices, moved around by military-like police used as security, and no longer feel like they have to answer to We The People for their actions. I WILL MAKE THIS LAW AND YOU WILL OBEY IT...OR ELSE.
And how is it that agencies can make regulations, that are not decided upon by our lawmakers, but have the full effect of a law? Every alphabet agency has a regulation book as thick as the laws in this country, and if you disobey any of them, guys with guns will come for you. The average person probably breaks 10 laws/regulations a day, and for the most part, it is ignored. Unless of course, you start to become a problem. All of a sudden, you're public enemy number one and must be dealt with. They simply record what you have done and as long as you are a quiet and compliant citizen...you may go about your day. Question their actions and you will lose your freedom.
And it is these regulations that need to stop. If an agency wants to make them, submit them to our lawmakers and they will decide what passes and what is tossed in the trash. It should be damned hard to make laws and regulations.
And while I'm at it, every law and regulation has a sunset period of say, every 4 years. If the law is good enough to create, it is good enough to maintain. Keep the bastards busy. The law has to be argued and discussed and approved every 4 years or it goes away. That way, if the law is important enough to them, they can put in the work. If not, well it probably wasn't a very good law to begin with. It would keep the lawbooks thin and easier to follow.
Remember when water was free and you had to pay for porn...
ReplyDelete"You can't stop the signal, Mal."
ReplyDeleteFunny how everyone is a first amendment absolutist until they don't like what the speaker has to say.
ReplyDeleteMy 2 concerns with this case:
1. If the First Amendment is subject to interpretation; what makes you think that the second amendment will not be subject to interpretation too?
2. How long before you to show identification on sites like this? How long before government gets to know everything about you before you are "free" to express your opinion?
They’re both already subject to interpretation. We draw the line at child porn, right? Should that be allowed because certain people argue it’s an expression of free speech?
Delete"The Orgasm Police" scolds and malcontents never sleep.
ReplyDeleteI suppose verifying anything at all really doesn't go well with porn. And I mean, a lot more so than with alcohol, cigarettes or the other age-restricted things.
ReplyDeleteMeh, whatever, I'm way over here in Europe and don't buy that stuff anyway.
Agreed. When you buy alcohol or cigarettes, you show the clerk an ID and that is it. It doesn't get recorded anywhere, and cannot be looked up later by the govt to see what you bought. However, the govt solution requires personal ID info be collected and stored somewhere, where the govt, data miners, scammers, etc. can access the info.
DeleteYou've never been to Reston, VA, have you? You buy alcohol, they scan your ID and the fact that you purchased a drink is now stored by the company forever, and since you're within 100 miles of D.C., the government gets to keep it, too.
DeleteTry again.
NYS already does this. Your DL is scanned to "verify" you're eligible to buy said cigarettes or alcohol.
DeleteNo one yet has given me a straight answer where that type data goes, who has access and how long.
Down here is FL, if you look over 30, they simply approve the sale without any ID check needed. If they do ask for ID, you show it, they glance at the date, and that is it...no scanning. A bit shocking to see they scan ID's in other states. But I am totally sure that big brother is not storing them scans somewhere to be used against you at a later time if need be...right? Right?
DeleteAt the risk of sounding unpopular here...I am against ANY govt regulation...even or porn sites. Have I looked at them...yes. However, I don't spend hours a day every day, every week doing so. I am sure I am not in the minority here. Anything the govt regulates gets overdone. Just like the govt should not regulate guns or free speech, so goes for the internet. Because once they regulate how we look at porn, what is next? They NEVER just stop on the intended goal. And as for the govt's current solution, citizens having to provide "proof" of age. As in how? My driver license number? Hell, the govt can't keep my personal info safe, but we have to trust that a porn site will? The scammers will have a field day.
ReplyDeleteI remember when the EPA was created for the supposed limited purpose of cleaning up sewer rivers in NJ (ie: Love Canal). Good intentions and all, but look at today what the EPA does. They now go after farmers for having a pond on their land and regulate any parcel of land that has standing water more than 48 hours after a rainfall. Again, they never stop at what they say they will. The internet should be open and free...even the "bad" things. It is the job of the parents to "regulate" their kid. There are means in place RIGHT NOW that parents can use to block sites and if need be, keep their kids off the internet if they abuse it. Will some kids get around the system...maybe...sure. But that is the price we pay for being in a FREE COUNTRY. Responsibility for doing right...and wrong, is on us...NOT THE GOVT.
And for the most part, I have no clue if this is true or not, but I do wonder, does easy access to porn on the internet have at least some benefit? What about unmarried ugly guys that can't get a date? Internet keeps the creeps at home sitting at their computer for hours if theyh want. No internet port does not mean they will stop it. Stupid fetishes get satisfied on the internet, where the poster and the viewer are both consenting. I'm fine with whatever they do.
The road to hell is pave with good intentions, and "protecting the children" has been used and abused in the name of govt regulation to the point I no longer trust them. The govt has enough on its plate in taking care of the country, the borders, foreign affairs, planes in the sky, the potholes in the roads. Let the parents take care of their kids. Not to mention, I bet a few of the founding fathers were "freaks" if you know what I mean, and would not want any govt intervention into their access of whatever it was they were doing. Keep it that way.
Or, am I wrong? I'm open to hear if you agree or not. Make an argument to sway me.
I agree with you 100%. And yes, some of the founding fathers were, in fact, freaky.
DeleteI too agree with you 100%. Nothing to take issue with in anything you wrote.
DeleteSo get them a subscription to a VPN
ReplyDelete