Seeing sex accidentally of your parents is different than porn. Porn is unhealthy and is ruining minors and adults lives. If we have the capability to stop minors form seeing porn, then everyone should be on board with that.
Crime is ruining people’s lives, if we can just make everyone demonstrate that they aren’t committing crime at any given time, crime will go down. So everyone should be on board with that.
Let me be direct. You are not able to understand the difference between something happening at a specific physical location, and access rights to that, vs something accessed via property not owned by that place. You, for whatever reason, either cannot, or refuse, to acknowledge that accessing data, on a device you own, puts the onus on you to stay within the law. If your kids are accessing some strip club’s stream, on devices you bought them, or on your property, then it is you that needs to make sure they don’t. Not the strip club, not the streaming platform, not the ISP. These “think of the children”, reactionary laws, that place parenting responsibilities on outside entities, are simply wedges to reduce protections of liberties from the government. This is moral panic 101.
You are sealioning. It’s literally all you do. You pretend to put forth a reasonable argument, but you ignore absolutely everything anyone else says, and then try to trap them with what you think are clever questions. But you’re just a pigeon shitting on a chess board claiming victory.
And you keep proving you are incapable of realizing that what you are saying is not the same as what is happening in REALITY. Your premise is foundationaly flawed. Accessing a porn site, and walking into a strip club, are completely different things. You, however, only seem to be able to understand that both have naked people in them, so they are the same.
It’s illegal for a kid to walk in a strip club, it’s also illegal for a kid to access porn. The difference is that the strip club has a physical door you can stop the kid from passing through. You can see, and physically interact with, the kid at the strip club. On the internet you do not have that. A kid can not change themselves to be someone else, and have reasonable proof that they are an adult, and in a location where this is legal, at a strip club, like they easily can online. With less than an hour with google, and some basic computer software, a child can easily make themselves look anyway they want to a porn site, ISP, platform, etc. The best one can do with the strip club is provide a fake ID if you look like you could be old enough. Guess what? If they do this it is THEIR fault, not the strip club’s. The strip club can say “hey they had an ID and look like they are old enough” because they can physically interact with them. False identification is what is happening when a child accesses porn. This time they have no physical person there to examine though. They are saying “yes I am legally able to get on here” and, since there is no reasonable way to make sure this is true, they get let in the door. If the legal penalty changes to the site provider, who exists in a REALITY where there is no reasonable way to ensure someone is who they say they are, then there is no reasonable way they can adhere to a law, thus effectively creating a blanket ban of online porn without having to say “we made something ruled to have first amendment protections illegal”.
If parents, who know, and have more control over, their child than anyone else, can’t stop them, what in hell makes you think some outside entity, who can only interact with them via layers of abstraction, could possibly do so? All this shit does is make kids learn how to mask their locations, and fake their credentials online, which is not hard to do. The only reasonable person to hold responsible for this is the child’s parents/care givers. The onus of liability has to fall on them. Even places like China can’t keep people from faking their identities online, yet you want to saddle porn sites with a legal burden if they can’t. But you don’t really want to stop children from accessing porn. You want porn to be illegal for everyone.
First sentence, I agree. Second, factually incorrect. 3rd, i agree, parents should be monitoring their children and teaching them about birds and bees for their age, giving them knowledge so they dont go looking cause they are curious.
Nothing said restricts websites in a whack a mole fashion as this will never work. Kids will always find a way around restrictions.
Feel free to do you own research, I am not going to do it for you. “BUT THAT MEANS IT DOENST EXIST!!!” Sure, whatever you want to believe, feel free, there is no convincing people that want to believe something.
Seeing sex accidentally of your parents is different than porn. Porn is unhealthy and is ruining minors and adults lives. If we have the capability to stop minors form seeing porn, then everyone should be on board with that.
Crime is ruining people’s lives, if we can just make everyone demonstrate that they aren’t committing crime at any given time, crime will go down. So everyone should be on board with that.
Strawman
Oh and the stupid child going into a strip club vs accessing something at home argument isn’t?
Nope, you just didnt understand the comparison.
Yes I did.
Let me be direct. You are not able to understand the difference between something happening at a specific physical location, and access rights to that, vs something accessed via property not owned by that place. You, for whatever reason, either cannot, or refuse, to acknowledge that accessing data, on a device you own, puts the onus on you to stay within the law. If your kids are accessing some strip club’s stream, on devices you bought them, or on your property, then it is you that needs to make sure they don’t. Not the strip club, not the streaming platform, not the ISP. These “think of the children”, reactionary laws, that place parenting responsibilities on outside entities, are simply wedges to reduce protections of liberties from the government. This is moral panic 101.
Well said.
That funny, you claim to know what I am saying and then explain a completely different thing…
You are sealioning. It’s literally all you do. You pretend to put forth a reasonable argument, but you ignore absolutely everything anyone else says, and then try to trap them with what you think are clever questions. But you’re just a pigeon shitting on a chess board claiming victory.
And you keep proving you are incapable of realizing that what you are saying is not the same as what is happening in REALITY. Your premise is foundationaly flawed. Accessing a porn site, and walking into a strip club, are completely different things. You, however, only seem to be able to understand that both have naked people in them, so they are the same.
It’s illegal for a kid to walk in a strip club, it’s also illegal for a kid to access porn. The difference is that the strip club has a physical door you can stop the kid from passing through. You can see, and physically interact with, the kid at the strip club. On the internet you do not have that. A kid can not change themselves to be someone else, and have reasonable proof that they are an adult, and in a location where this is legal, at a strip club, like they easily can online. With less than an hour with google, and some basic computer software, a child can easily make themselves look anyway they want to a porn site, ISP, platform, etc. The best one can do with the strip club is provide a fake ID if you look like you could be old enough. Guess what? If they do this it is THEIR fault, not the strip club’s. The strip club can say “hey they had an ID and look like they are old enough” because they can physically interact with them. False identification is what is happening when a child accesses porn. This time they have no physical person there to examine though. They are saying “yes I am legally able to get on here” and, since there is no reasonable way to make sure this is true, they get let in the door. If the legal penalty changes to the site provider, who exists in a REALITY where there is no reasonable way to ensure someone is who they say they are, then there is no reasonable way they can adhere to a law, thus effectively creating a blanket ban of online porn without having to say “we made something ruled to have first amendment protections illegal”.
If parents, who know, and have more control over, their child than anyone else, can’t stop them, what in hell makes you think some outside entity, who can only interact with them via layers of abstraction, could possibly do so? All this shit does is make kids learn how to mask their locations, and fake their credentials online, which is not hard to do. The only reasonable person to hold responsible for this is the child’s parents/care givers. The onus of liability has to fall on them. Even places like China can’t keep people from faking their identities online, yet you want to saddle porn sites with a legal burden if they can’t. But you don’t really want to stop children from accessing porn. You want porn to be illegal for everyone.
First sentence, I agree. Second, factually incorrect. 3rd, i agree, parents should be monitoring their children and teaching them about birds and bees for their age, giving them knowledge so they dont go looking cause they are curious.
Nothing said restricts websites in a whack a mole fashion as this will never work. Kids will always find a way around restrictions.
Porn is unhealthy, if you disagree then you are obviously wrong, and anyone with an ounce of wisdom could tell you that.
Did Andrew Tate sell you a bunch of pills to leave the Matrix as well?
deleted by creator
Strawman
Please show me the studies that prove porn is ruining minors and adult’s lives
Feel free to do you own research, I am not going to do it for you. “BUT THAT MEANS IT DOENST EXIST!!!” Sure, whatever you want to believe, feel free, there is no convincing people that want to believe something.
Nice cop out.
Great!