Porn should be banned, here’s why

[Luce]

A world in which most law abiding citizens have nothing to do with.

The great thing is it wouldn't be readily available for those of us trying to protect our kids.

Hmmm.

"The great thing is that guns wouldn't be readily available for those of us trying to protect our kids."

Imagine that.

 

[Waddy]

For government to have "No morals" is sure is heavily invested in the morality business.

Government likes imposing morals on you and me, but the ruling class has no morals.

 

[mike2810]

/sarcasm on
Wait. Shut down the porn industry. Look at the thousands that would put out of work. Everything from the camera person, sound, lighting, film editor, actors, directors, etc.
Some were outraged with the cancelling of the Pipeline because of the job loss. Why not outrage here if porn was banned.
/sarcasm off

No one is forcing someone to watch or purchase porn. Better to try and regulate than to have a "black market".

 

[Linuxcooldude]

My problem with porn is once it went online it became available to children. Given porn includes rape porn, abuse porn, bestiality, etc, I see it as a real problem as it intermingles violence, rape, sadism etc with sex as a norm including to children. "Click here if you are not 18" doesn't work and everyone knows it.

Its parents responsibility to monitor their children.

 

[jimbo]

That is an assumption for which you have no evidence. You probably subscribe to the “prohibition mentality” which is the false claim prohibition doesn’t work because it never has worked, but that’s not true. Far fewer adults viewed porn when it required going to a video store and showing your ID to a rental clerk and giving your phone number. Magazines like playboy depict stills of adults.

so making it hard to view porn will decrease abuse, not increase it. And it will make it harder to hide child abuse amongst a sea of “legal” content.

when we prohibited alcohol in the 20s actual alcoholism cratered and so did rates of cihrrosis of the liver. Showing massive compliance with prohibition

Says the person who started this thread with a bunch of statements for which you have no evidence.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Says the person who started this thread with a bunch of statements for which you have no evidence.

I made arguments, which you have not disproved.

You have not provided evidence for why any argument is wrong.

 

[HenryChinaski]

I made arguments, which you have not disproved.

You have not provided evidence for why any argument is wrong.

Quite a bit of porn these days consists of couples married or otherwise that film themselves humping and post it online because they like being watched. No exploitation, just freaky couples that are adults making their own decisions. Scripted studio porn is nearly a thing of the past.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Quite a bit of porn these days consists of couples married or otherwise that film themselves humping and post it online because they like being watched. No exploitation, just freaky couples that are adults making their own decisions. Scripted studio porn is nearly a thing of the past.

“Quite a bit” is a non quantifiable statement and in any event you can construct a hypothetical porn scenario where everyone involved is not in any way harmed, but that’s a fiction and there’s no way to enforce that seperately from porn which is produced with exploitation. And in any event the largest reason to ban pornography is because it’s morally wrong. All the negative secondary reasons like exploitation, trafficking, negative psychological damage, flow from the primary cause which is that porn is wrong.

 

[HenryChinaski]

“Quite a bit” is a non quantifiable statement and in any event you can construct a hypothetical porn scenario where everyone involved is not in any way harmed, but that’s a fiction and there’s no way to enforce that seperately from porn which is produced with exploitation. And in any event the largest reason to ban pornography is because it’s morally wrong. All the negative secondary reasons like exploitation, trafficking, negative psychological damage, flow from the primary cause which is that porn is wrong.

Your pretensions to moral superiority are far more destructive than what you claim is "immoral"

 

[jimbo]

I made arguments, which you have not disproved.

You have not provided evidence for why any argument is wrong.

Not my job. You made the statements. You provide the evidence.

 

[jimbo]

“Quite a bit” is a non quantifiable statement and in any event you can construct a hypothetical porn scenario where everyone involved is not in any way harmed, but that’s a fiction and there’s no way to enforce that seperately from porn which is produced with exploitation. And in any event the largest reason to ban pornography is because it’s morally wrong. All the negative secondary reasons like exploitation, trafficking, negative psychological damage, flow from the primary cause which is that porn is wrong.

It's not the job of government to legislate morality.

The vast majority of porn is produced without exploitation. It's two or more people voluntarily doing the deed with a camera running. And 100% of those tuning in are doing so voluntarily.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

It's not the job of government to legislate morality.

that’s the sole reason of government.
The vast majority of porn is produced without exploitation. It's two or more people voluntarily doing the deed with a camera running. And 100% of those tuning in are doing so voluntarily.
[/QUOTE] you cannot prove such, and also it doesn’t matter, because watching porn has negative effects. When gin began to destroy British society the Crown instituted massive taxes and licensing of distilleries and gin consumption went down. The US had prohibition which destroyed the old saloon culture and even after its repeal alcoholism hasn’t returned to pre-prohibition levels. High taxes on tobacco have encouraged many to quit smoking.

Mere “consent” is not a valid excuse to do things bad for society, society can and should regulate evil behavior. And such regulation is nearly always effective. If cancel culture canceled wankers like they do “racists” you better believe pornhub would be out of business tonight.

 

[Lursa]

Your pretensions to moral superiority are far more destructive than what you claim is "immoral"

He believes that it's moral for a husband to force his wife to have sex against her will.

 

[HenryChinaski]

He believes that it's moral for a husband to force his wife to have sex against her will.

Yep and that is disturbing.

 

[jimbo]

that’s the sole reason of government.
The vast majority of porn is produced without exploitation. It's two or more people voluntarily doing the deed with a camera running. And 100% of those tuning in are doing so voluntarily.

you cannot prove such, and also it doesn’t matter, because watching porn has negative effects. When gin began to destroy British society the Crown instituted massive taxes and licensing of distilleries and gin consumption went down. The US had prohibition which destroyed the old saloon culture and even after its repeal alcoholism hasn’t returned to pre-prohibition levels. High taxes on tobacco have encouraged many to quit smoking.

Mere “consent” is not a valid excuse to do things bad for society, society can and should regulate evil behavior. And such regulation is nearly always effective. If cancel culture canceled wankers like they do “racists” you better believe pornhub would be out of business tonight.
[/QUOTE]

Legislating morality is the sole reason for government?

The British (and the US) taxed alcohol to get a piece of the action. If your statement was true government would have tried to ban it.

Porn does not have negative effects. At least none that can be proven.

The problem lies in deciding who gets to decide what is evil behavior.
You or me.

 

[Luce]

I made arguments, which you have not disproved.

You have not provided evidence for why any argument is wrong.

It's your responsibility to prove your arguments correct. You know the rules.

 

[Lursa]

you cannot prove such, and also it doesn’t matter, because watching porn has negative effects. When gin began to destroy British society the Crown instituted massive taxes and licensing of distilleries and gin consumption went down. The US had prohibition which destroyed the old saloon culture and even after its repeal alcoholism hasn’t returned to pre-prohibition levels. High taxes on tobacco have encouraged many to quit smoking.

Mere “consent” is not a valid excuse to do things bad for society, society can and should regulate evil behavior. And such regulation is nearly always effective. If cancel culture canceled wankers like they do “racists” you better believe pornhub would be out of business tonight.

There are few if any harmful effects on society. Gay marriage, gay relationships, porn, birth control, sex outside marriage...no harm. And if there are harmful effects, they are BECAUSE society creates them in repression, hate, intolerance, etc.

The only reason YOU believe they are immoral is because your cult told you they are because if people engage in those things, they are less likely to commit to having more kids, meaning fewer hands to put $$ in their collection plates.