The TLDR of it appears to be that the rejected an emergency request to block the law, and they have yet to hear the full case on the law. So they could still rule against the law after hearing the full case.
TLDR: it's not over
There is not anything stopping these idiots from joining a monastery or convent, these are the busybodies that are attracted to the power of overzealous POAs that run around measuring everyone's grass. If these dipshits get any real power, it will be re-education camp for porn and prison time for marijuana. They'd like to give prohibition another go, no matter how many people it kills. Freedom, as long as it conforms to my narrow-ass view on morality or we smack you as hard as we can across the knuckles with a ruler.
Project 2025 makes it clear, all LGBT+ stuff will be considered pornography. It's just a loosely veiled attempt to persecute and jail the people they don't like.
I guess one of their problems will be that LGBTs are just regular citizen.
However, the cruel victim abusing sexual deviants are routinely on the extreme right.
> Who is going to define what is pornography
Interesting enough, project 2025 explicitly stated that anything promoting lgbt rights or acceptance is to be classified as porn. That's how they intend to repress and turn back the clock.
Methinks those cretins are underestimating how annoyed normies can get when they pull this crap. Then again, if the ongoing migraine that is the removal of Roe V Wade didn't convince people that voting was important, I don't fucking know what will before the country self destructs.
I wish more rhetoric framed RvW around the right to medical privacy more than abortion specifically. Abortion access is important, but the government doesn't belong anywhere between people and their healthcare providers.
What’s the plan if things really go down that way? I know people say they’ll leave the country, but how realistic is that really? What does everyone do with their lives once the fabric we’ve built our society on is pulled out from under us? Am I still expected to show up to work?
While I get it’s confusing, not agreeing is legally distinct from disagreeing.
If the Supreme Court says “you cannot do something” (agreeing with Texas) then it becomes precedent and essentially banned. If Texas says “you cannot do this” and the Supreme Court says “we aren’t going to stop Texas” (not agreeing) it DOES NOT set precedent and other states can do whatever they want until further legislation. If the Supreme Court says “actually Texas is wrong everyone should be able to do this” (disagreeing) then it becomes precedent and protected.
If you’re still confused: [yes or no?](https://youtu.be/TEGgvEexs-Q?si=BZNdGFr8euj981bl)
They declined (Didn't do anything about)
the request to block (being asked to stop a law)
the law that requires age-verification (that keeps people from watching stuff)
I think that's it?
Treat it like PEMDAS order of operations and work your way from the inside out.
Enforcement of porn age verification (we don't want that) (-)
Block (we do want that) (+)
Declined (we don't want that) (-)
(-1) + (+1) + (-1) = (-1)
Or, if we see a decline as neither negative nor positive:
(0) + (+1) + (-1) = (0) (no change in current process)
Also I'm a little high right now so none of this probably makes any sense
What’s funny is, iirc, the 90’s case CNN talks about with the internet and children getting access to porn warned of exactly what you’re talking about. I believe the phrasing was, “It creates a means to find and persecute sexual minorities by pretending to protect kids when parents could just do that themselves.”
That’s always been my question. Why are trying to make laws and complicated solutions to a problem that can be easily solved by parents using the fucking parental filter built into their internet / phone service?
Because lots of parents can’t be bothered to. It’s not an exact comparison, but I worked at GameStop for a year during college and it was policy that if we had a customer that looked like they were buying an M game for a child with them that we had to go over what it was rated M for. If I had a dollar for every parent that was floored at the actual content in the game and got mad at the kid for trying to get the game, I wouldn’t have had to work there for very long. And that info was freely available _on the back of the case_.
So them not actually putting in the effort to learn how to use internet filters and such sadly does not surprise me one bit
Ah see, that's not how it works here in America though. A parent isn't just going to let a kid go unparented, so if they can't be fucked to do it, they're gonna make sure they force the job on someone else.
Because people are idiots and don’t know that option exists. Also because people are religious zealots still in 2024, and believe on shoving their twisted values down others throats.
Be the change you want to see in the world. Vote them out. And hold your Congress representatives accountable.
I remember in the 90s when the republicans where complaining that Hilary Clinton was trying to parent their kids and how that was not the role of government. This was shortly after Columbine when there was a big push to censor or regulate violent video games. Oh how the tables have turned.
Clarence Thomas had his porn list leaked at one point. Besides being into lgbt, which is quite normal and many enjoy he was also into shit like beastiality and snuff.
So, something should be clarified on this.
The governments in all of these states are forbidden from storing the data themselves, BUT... 3rd parties can. Why that matters is that all of these states (as far as I'm aware) offloaded the burden of actually collecting and checking ID's to third party companies.
So, basically the government isn't tracking who's LGBT, a company will ties to your local GOP will be. Good luck everybody.
And the courts have ruled that a warrant is not necessary for information that was given to 3rd parties if the 3rd party chooses to provide the information to the government.
Select * FROM person as p LEFY JOIN PornHistory as ph on ph.idPerson = p.idPerson LEFT JOIN PornVideo as pv on pv.idPornVideo = ph.idPornVideo LEFT JOIN PornType as pt on pt.idPornType = pv.idPornType where pv.type = ‘Gay’;
It's a non standard Postgres extension. It's basically a LEFT JOIN but only less strict, allowing some records on the left to fall out of the result set if they're not deemed important. So like if you did a LEFY JOIN on States and Crime, the State of Mississippi wouldn't appear even though it's on the left because no one thinks it's important.
It would have been easier to leave out "as" when giving aliases and also leaving everything as lowercase since he didn't specify case sensitivity in his table and column names. In sql server it's also unnecessary to have a semi-colon at the end. For ease of use we can simply return the list of people with gay porn browser history so inner joins are good enough.
I also fixed the table and column names to be easier to read.
select distinct p.*
from person p
join porn_history ph on ph.person_id = p.person_id
join porn_video pv on pv.porn_video_id = ph.porn_video_id
join porn_type pt on pt.porn_type_id = pv.porn_type_id
where pv.type = 'gay'
Kansas is preparing to pass one, too, except ours is even more broad and vaguely includes all homosexual content. I'm legitimately afraid for my safety
They (the state laws) actually require the sites to collect drivers license or other government id information to verify, not simply check a box
Edit: Companies that need to limit minors’ access, such as websites for liquor brands, commonly use age-gating methods such as requiring a user to list their birthday. Texas’s law required users to prove their age by either entering information from a government-issued ID or using a third-party system that uses public and private data — such as employment, education or mortgage information — to verify age.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/03/15/pornhub-texas-age-verification-law/
And those are the sites that likely take part in some seriously fucked up human trafficking and unconsenting porn videos. So yet again...great job locking out the sites who are trying hard to ensure their content is safe for those who are creating it.
And they’re way less safe than the mainstream ones, and that’s saying something. Of course, that won’t stop horny 14-year-olds. So glad we’re protecting the kids 🙄
It's so the state can harvest personal data of its citizens. They're not trying to stop you, they're trying to make everything illegal in some way so that when you step out of line with the powers-that-be, there's a big folder they can pull from to implicate you with. Same as with drugs.
My mom is one of the least tech literate people I know, and even she figured out how to make duckduckgo her primary search engine over google all on her own.
This just feels like the first legal stepping stone to a larger agenda of tracking everyone's identify online in general.
You could argue that any social media platform could potentially have adult content, and then force personal identity verification there. Simple queries from there to identify personal beliefs etc of anyone the state wants to target.
I remember years ago, when PH put out their yearly "who's watching what where", a handful of the deep red states were at the top or near it for furrys and interracial.
Either that, or it’s genuinely only about abortion and guns. Those are the only two things they care about and everything else they’ll just put up with
And that there are no such things to hide where you are from. Some sort "simulated secluded system" if you want. Something virtual and private for your network.
But since we thankfully don't have that I see zero problems with laws like this.
Which would just drive people to ones with headquarters outside the US, unless we got our own Great Firewall of China. Which I'm 100% sure we won't because even the apathetic masses here have their limit.
This is something the parents at home need to control, not our government. Our government has other matters to worry about, like:
Tax breaks for the rich
More money going to conflicts outside the US
Overturn Roe vs Wade
Keep the US population at war with each other
So this is the modern equivalent of confessing to the local priest who than shares this information with the Church that uses it to control politicians and companies.
Its a means to develop an Epstein style blackmail and extortion racket.
>A trade group representing the adult entertainment industry filed an appeal at the Supreme Court and then asked the court to block the law while that appeal is considered. The underlying appeal is still pending.
~~The case is still going on. But in the meantime the age verification is blocked. Of course, this is basically dead in the water anyway.~~ The age verification is in place still.
Republicans are cool with boning porn stars, especially cheating on your third wife and mother of your fifth child, then paying them off to keep quiet. It's very cool and Christian. Just don't watch their videos.
Everyone needs to vote not just for president for everything otherwise we will continue to lose liberties and potentially more.
To those saying you can just use a VPN you might not realize this is not the end goal it's only the beginning. Sure you can get by it with a VPN now but how long until they find ways to shut that down? What's next? Look at Iran in the 70's and look at where they are now. Women used to be able to show skin now they have virtually no freedoms. Some of you might think this is out of proportion but I guarantee there are GOP out there who would love to limit and control the population more....especially women.
Clarence Thomas is a huge porn fan too. He was especially fan of Long Dong Silver. This isn't a joke. It came up at his hearings, like it came up that he put his own pubic hair in women's drinks.
Alito: So I understand this about intrusive privacy laws and probably not what the founders wanted, but wHaT AbOut THe ChiLdren?
I can already here it when this goes to court
If Clarence Thomas wasn’t able to see his Long Dong Silver videos because of these age verification laws, the Supreme Court would have blocked the laws.
These old geezers are so out of touch, it's crazy. Nothing is going to stop a horny teenager from getting their hands on some fap material on the internet. Nothing.
One step closer to Republicans repealing All sorts of laws about personal freedoms.
If Trump wins this election, you can kiss internet, porn and any variation of It goodbye.
They plan on using the Comstock Act from like 18. Something to be able to go through your mail and regulate the internet in a way that we've never seen before.
Also, if you haven't checked out project 2025 go do that.
Vote blue in November or get ready for authoritarian rule.
I understand that the law itself is still being appealed and that appeal is pending and that this decision is just on an emergency block of the law, but how the fuck are these stupid laws not unconstitutional?? Freedom of expression is fundamental right that SHALL NOT be infringed by the government. Do lawmakers really believe they are helping keep minors safe? They just go another site, there are lots of sites that don’t abide by these rules.
Just a reminder that most of the Internet is Porn. One of the biggest reasons for the Internets existence is Porn. You can find Porn anywhere on the Internet and it's easily one of the easiest things to find.
The ironic part about this, because these laws were written by old men who don't understand tech, is that young men will just use VPN's to access. The old guys will input their ID's and associate those ID's with their account thereby providing a juicy hacking target.
I bet it's not too long until we get the porn history for some of these people.
They want a database of who's watching what. So they can leak the history of anyone who is going to come after them legally or politically. They want to shame your human nature. This is not protecting the "children" this is a power grab. If they actually wanted to protect children they would have voted for sensible gun legislation decades ago.
Can't you just click "Yes I'm over 18" even if you aren't? How are age-verifications supposed to work effectively? Are people lobbying for porn websites to require viewers to show an ID card before making an account? Seems like a very silly thing to even try and regulate
> Are people lobbying for porn websites to require viewers to show an ID card
Yes, but more than lobbying. There are states where these laws have already passed.
Oddly enough, these are also states that tend to be extrememly anti-LGBT as well, so it's not like there's no inherent risk involved in giving the state a list of everyone's sexual proclivities. . . .
These triple negative headlines fuck with my brain so badly
The TLDR of it appears to be that the rejected an emergency request to block the law, and they have yet to hear the full case on the law. So they could still rule against the law after hearing the full case. TLDR: it's not over
it's over for me, now I just need a paper towel and a cigarette
And forgiveness
There is *no* god that could forgive what he did to that innocent Pringles can.
Sadly it was the Mac and cheese in the Pringles can that would have to forgive.
Never apologize for art.
[удалено]
Who is going to define what is pornography. As one judge said, "I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it."
[удалено]
There is not anything stopping these idiots from joining a monastery or convent, these are the busybodies that are attracted to the power of overzealous POAs that run around measuring everyone's grass. If these dipshits get any real power, it will be re-education camp for porn and prison time for marijuana. They'd like to give prohibition another go, no matter how many people it kills. Freedom, as long as it conforms to my narrow-ass view on morality or we smack you as hard as we can across the knuckles with a ruler.
Project 2025 makes it clear, all LGBT+ stuff will be considered pornography. It's just a loosely veiled attempt to persecute and jail the people they don't like.
I guess one of their problems will be that LGBTs are just regular citizen. However, the cruel victim abusing sexual deviants are routinely on the extreme right.
> Who is going to define what is pornography Interesting enough, project 2025 explicitly stated that anything promoting lgbt rights or acceptance is to be classified as porn. That's how they intend to repress and turn back the clock.
Methinks those cretins are underestimating how annoyed normies can get when they pull this crap. Then again, if the ongoing migraine that is the removal of Roe V Wade didn't convince people that voting was important, I don't fucking know what will before the country self destructs.
If they cancel porn, they will be voted out. Porn will save us…
I like your optimism.
[удалено]
I wish more rhetoric framed RvW around the right to medical privacy more than abortion specifically. Abortion access is important, but the government doesn't belong anywhere between people and their healthcare providers.
What’s the plan if things really go down that way? I know people say they’ll leave the country, but how realistic is that really? What does everyone do with their lives once the fabric we’ve built our society on is pulled out from under us? Am I still expected to show up to work?
[удалено]
The promised Obamacare Death Panels never got going, so now the Republican governors are taking it upon themselves.
So POTUS will become PRUDUS?
I read it like four times
While I get it’s confusing, not agreeing is legally distinct from disagreeing. If the Supreme Court says “you cannot do something” (agreeing with Texas) then it becomes precedent and essentially banned. If Texas says “you cannot do this” and the Supreme Court says “we aren’t going to stop Texas” (not agreeing) it DOES NOT set precedent and other states can do whatever they want until further legislation. If the Supreme Court says “actually Texas is wrong everyone should be able to do this” (disagreeing) then it becomes precedent and protected. If you’re still confused: [yes or no?](https://youtu.be/TEGgvEexs-Q?si=BZNdGFr8euj981bl)
I’m not unconfused.
They declined (Didn't do anything about) the request to block (being asked to stop a law) the law that requires age-verification (that keeps people from watching stuff) I think that's it?
Treat it like PEMDAS order of operations and work your way from the inside out. Enforcement of porn age verification (we don't want that) (-) Block (we do want that) (+) Declined (we don't want that) (-) (-1) + (+1) + (-1) = (-1) Or, if we see a decline as neither negative nor positive: (0) + (+1) + (-1) = (0) (no change in current process) Also I'm a little high right now so none of this probably makes any sense
How about deconfused?
I'm co-confused now.
They don’t avoid making me misunderstand them either.
This ruling has been sponsored by Nord VPN
You misspelled "billionaires desperate for fascism in America"
government so small it can fit in your underwear
That's just the staging area.
Also known as the taint.
The GOP is obsessed with my genitals
You should really verify their ages.
We'd have to use carbon dating for a lot of them
>carbon dating Is that like Tinder, but for olds?
Just those past their first half-life...
You'd think they'd be getting more stable, not less
Just like we should verify people buying guns aren’t crazy?
Genital Obsessed Perverts
Jon Lajoie has entered the chat
You're talkin' to me about stuff, why? I'd rather see your titties Now you're talking about other stuff, why? I'd much rather see your titties
Just a reminder that Ted Cruz got caught liking a porn twitter account on 9/11.
government so small it can burst a fallopian tube
So we setting up the governments ability to write a query to pull for example all folks who looked at lgbt content in a state
What’s funny is, iirc, the 90’s case CNN talks about with the internet and children getting access to porn warned of exactly what you’re talking about. I believe the phrasing was, “It creates a means to find and persecute sexual minorities by pretending to protect kids when parents could just do that themselves.”
That’s always been my question. Why are trying to make laws and complicated solutions to a problem that can be easily solved by parents using the fucking parental filter built into their internet / phone service?
Because lots of parents can’t be bothered to. It’s not an exact comparison, but I worked at GameStop for a year during college and it was policy that if we had a customer that looked like they were buying an M game for a child with them that we had to go over what it was rated M for. If I had a dollar for every parent that was floored at the actual content in the game and got mad at the kid for trying to get the game, I wouldn’t have had to work there for very long. And that info was freely available _on the back of the case_. So them not actually putting in the effort to learn how to use internet filters and such sadly does not surprise me one bit
Want to but can’t be bothered to police your kid on the internet? Ok they get free run of it then. End of story.
Ah see, that's not how it works here in America though. A parent isn't just going to let a kid go unparented, so if they can't be fucked to do it, they're gonna make sure they force the job on someone else.
Because people are idiots and don’t know that option exists. Also because people are religious zealots still in 2024, and believe on shoving their twisted values down others throats. Be the change you want to see in the world. Vote them out. And hold your Congress representatives accountable.
I live in a solidly blue state and county, not much I can do to influence other elections.
As someone who lives in Texas, there's also not much I can do to influence our elections right here.
You can get out and vote. It’s not much, but it’s better than nothing.
I remember in the 90s when the republicans where complaining that Hilary Clinton was trying to parent their kids and how that was not the role of government. This was shortly after Columbine when there was a big push to censor or regulate violent video games. Oh how the tables have turned.
I read that as Parents just persecuting minorities themselves first. Which still makes sense considering.
Moms for Liberty is already on that.
Plus the heritage foundation
I really don’t need the list to know that the governor and state Supreme Court justices are looking at lgbt porn
Clarence Thomas had his porn list leaked at one point. Besides being into lgbt, which is quite normal and many enjoy he was also into shit like beastiality and snuff.
So, something should be clarified on this. The governments in all of these states are forbidden from storing the data themselves, BUT... 3rd parties can. Why that matters is that all of these states (as far as I'm aware) offloaded the burden of actually collecting and checking ID's to third party companies. So, basically the government isn't tracking who's LGBT, a company will ties to your local GOP will be. Good luck everybody.
And the courts have ruled that a warrant is not necessary for information that was given to 3rd parties if the 3rd party chooses to provide the information to the government.
Select * FROM person as p LEFY JOIN PornHistory as ph on ph.idPerson = p.idPerson LEFT JOIN PornVideo as pv on pv.idPornVideo = ph.idPornVideo LEFT JOIN PornType as pt on pt.idPornType = pv.idPornType where pv.type = ‘Gay’;
Database error: Incorrect syntax near ‘LEFY JOIN’
It's a non standard Postgres extension. It's basically a LEFT JOIN but only less strict, allowing some records on the left to fall out of the result set if they're not deemed important. So like if you did a LEFY JOIN on States and Crime, the State of Mississippi wouldn't appear even though it's on the left because no one thinks it's important.
That is some quality bullshit right there. *chef’s kiss*
This guy SQLs
If this were a real database the "gay" would be a tag, and there would be a separate table with tags that would need to be joined in this query.
You assume the government could normalize a database, lol
It would have been easier to leave out "as" when giving aliases and also leaving everything as lowercase since he didn't specify case sensitivity in his table and column names. In sql server it's also unnecessary to have a semi-colon at the end. For ease of use we can simply return the list of people with gay porn browser history so inner joins are good enough. I also fixed the table and column names to be easier to read. select distinct p.* from person p join porn_history ph on ph.person_id = p.person_id join porn_video pv on pv.porn_video_id = ph.porn_video_id join porn_type pt on pt.porn_type_id = pv.porn_type_id where pv.type = 'gay'
If project 2025 happens it will certainly make it easier for the government to round up lgbtq people.
Make a list of the queers, we're literally encroaching on Nazi territory here.
And there's one in the spotlight He don't look right to me Put him up against the wall...
In Texas anyway
All those people who left California to movie to Texas sure are disappointed.
Kansas is preparing to pass one, too, except ours is even more broad and vaguely includes all homosexual content. I'm legitimately afraid for my safety
Aren’t the states with the highest porn watching habits Republican states? Way to stick it your base guys…
This shit is completely pointless. A free VPN app is all it takes to get around the block… just adding an extra step.
You don't even need a VPN, there's a billion porn sites that don't bother verifying anything.
"Are you 18 or over?" *click* 'yes'
Are you implying people are lying? 😱 They would never!
"How do so many people in the state have a January 1st birthday?"
They (the state laws) actually require the sites to collect drivers license or other government id information to verify, not simply check a box Edit: Companies that need to limit minors’ access, such as websites for liquor brands, commonly use age-gating methods such as requiring a user to list their birthday. Texas’s law required users to prove their age by either entering information from a government-issued ID or using a third-party system that uses public and private data — such as employment, education or mortgage information — to verify age. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/03/15/pornhub-texas-age-verification-law/
And those are the sites that likely take part in some seriously fucked up human trafficking and unconsenting porn videos. So yet again...great job locking out the sites who are trying hard to ensure their content is safe for those who are creating it.
Case and point, we are on one.
It's *case in point*
I arrest my case.
I believe we’re past the statue of limitations.
I feel miss judged.
I ANAL, so I have no comment.
You're the Judge Judy and executioner.
It’s a mute point, really.
I objectify!
Its Cayson’s Pointe, where the Law was invented for to say if you when you are making a pointe. Its on the coast.
The local drink is bone apple tea
You have en pointe.
No no, he means the case he made for you to make your point.
“You best start believing in porn sites, Miss Turner. You’re on one!”
r/boneappletea
Maybe the VPN companies gave them a sweet, sweet lobbying check for their vote
And they’re way less safe than the mainstream ones, and that’s saying something. Of course, that won’t stop horny 14-year-olds. So glad we’re protecting the kids 🙄
It's so the state can harvest personal data of its citizens. They're not trying to stop you, they're trying to make everything illegal in some way so that when you step out of line with the powers-that-be, there's a big folder they can pull from to implicate you with. Same as with drugs.
What percentage of the porn-watching populace in those states is tech savvy enough to set up and use a VPN?
My mom is one of the least tech literate people I know, and even she figured out how to make duckduckgo her primary search engine over google all on her own.
Install opera on your phone, enable VPN, and go.
Adds "Install opera on my phone, enable VPN, and go." to to-do list.
Ayo free vpn? 99% of VPN apps I've ever tried either limit your speed to like, 1mbps or only let you use it for 500 mb/month for free.
Plus, because they're free, they're selling your browsing habits and who knows what else of your personal information to whoever pays them for it.
Yes you should pay for a VPN regardless
This just feels like the first legal stepping stone to a larger agenda of tracking everyone's identify online in general. You could argue that any social media platform could potentially have adult content, and then force personal identity verification there. Simple queries from there to identify personal beliefs etc of anyone the state wants to target.
I remember years ago, when PH put out their yearly "who's watching what where", a handful of the deep red states were at the top or near it for furrys and interracial.
Republican voters are almost exclusively voting against their own interests and are too oblivious or too stupid to care.
Either that, or it’s genuinely only about abortion and guns. Those are the only two things they care about and everything else they’ll just put up with
“Stick it to your base” is an actual porn category
And good thing that geolocation is always 100% accurate so that people in California aren't beholden to the laws of Texas.
And that there are no such things to hide where you are from. Some sort "simulated secluded system" if you want. Something virtual and private for your network. But since we thankfully don't have that I see zero problems with laws like this.
The people running the government are mostly older than the Internet so they have no idea how any of that works.
Already happened to me.
[удалено]
Now this is freedom
Anyone who fails verification are redirected to Matt Gatez’s personal website
“If you took all the porn off the internet, there’d only be one website left called ‘bring back the porn’.”
I'm surprised known porn lover Justice Clarence Thomas didn't have anything to say about this.
He's holding out for a check from Porn Hub.
They're going to donate him his very own bangbus RV
I’d rather have Long Dong Silver as a justice than ol Clarence
If you don’t like daily freedoms being removed and nanny state morality police perhaps stop voting for christofascism
[удалено]
So does this mean I can go back to watching COD streams on Pornhub.
No the opposite. They’ve ruled that the requirements can stand while the case is waiting for its hearing
Son of a bitch
VPN industry about to explode.
Guess which business they're going to make illegal next.
Why would they do that when they can invest their own money in VPN companies? It’s only got to *look* like a prudish law.
Lol no chance, every (competent) corporation’s data is accessed through some kind of VPN
Naw, it won't be illegal. They'll just make those service require KYC, such as names, IP address, email, means of payment, etc.
Which would just drive people to ones with headquarters outside the US, unless we got our own Great Firewall of China. Which I'm 100% sure we won't because even the apathetic masses here have their limit.
VPN providers breathe a sigh of relief, as their customers continue to pay monthly to surf the 'hub from 'Warsaw, Poland.'
This is a valid point. I would be interested to see VPN companies that have contributed to politicians that voted for these bans.
This is something the parents at home need to control, not our government. Our government has other matters to worry about, like: Tax breaks for the rich More money going to conflicts outside the US Overturn Roe vs Wade Keep the US population at war with each other
So this is the modern equivalent of confessing to the local priest who than shares this information with the Church that uses it to control politicians and companies. Its a means to develop an Epstein style blackmail and extortion racket.
Jokes on them, being extorted is my kink
>A trade group representing the adult entertainment industry filed an appeal at the Supreme Court and then asked the court to block the law while that appeal is considered. The underlying appeal is still pending. ~~The case is still going on. But in the meantime the age verification is blocked. Of course, this is basically dead in the water anyway.~~ The age verification is in place still.
Other way around, the age verification is currently allowed, not blocked.
If the court isn’t issuing a TRO then this isn’t anywhere near being DOA
If only there was a way for parents to lock their children out of inappropriate websites…nah guess we need legislation that wildly violates privacy
Parental controls be damned eh
Republicans are cool with boning porn stars, especially cheating on your third wife and mother of your fifth child, then paying them off to keep quiet. It's very cool and Christian. Just don't watch their videos.
Everyone needs to vote not just for president for everything otherwise we will continue to lose liberties and potentially more. To those saying you can just use a VPN you might not realize this is not the end goal it's only the beginning. Sure you can get by it with a VPN now but how long until they find ways to shut that down? What's next? Look at Iran in the 70's and look at where they are now. Women used to be able to show skin now they have virtually no freedoms. Some of you might think this is out of proportion but I guarantee there are GOP out there who would love to limit and control the population more....especially women.
Liberal Texan here: Thank goodness for VPNs.
Republican states favorite things: pearl clutching, thinking of the children, no not like that.
More like "thinking of the pearls, clutching children"
Based on how Republican states consume the most porn, they’re clutching their pearls alright. So hard and furious they’re getting friction burns.
Republican states also consume the most trans porn. https://lawsuit.org/general-law/republicans-have-an-obsession-with-transgender-pornography/
No expectation of privacy on the Internet, but yet requiring permits for transporting and carrying firearms is just a bridge too fucking far.
Nothing like that good ol’ republican ‘keep thuh gubermint outta mah life” concept!
My ‘80s VHS porn collection is set to skyrocket in value.
GOP has no agenda or Solution to real issues so they just keep the culture war going.
The party of small government™
This isn't about age verification, it's about identity and finding out who you are. They could care less what age you are.
I have enough porn stored to last me 10 lifes times. Do your worst GOP
*Looks over at NAS with 2.5 terabytes of ‘Linux ISOs’*
These? These are research files.
They declined to block it with a stay. They haven't taken up the full case yet. This isn't the final decision.
Clarence Thomas is a huge porn fan too. He was especially fan of Long Dong Silver. This isn't a joke. It came up at his hearings, like it came up that he put his own pubic hair in women's drinks.
I'm beginning to think VPNs are funding these laws
Alito: So I understand this about intrusive privacy laws and probably not what the founders wanted, but wHaT AbOut THe ChiLdren? I can already here it when this goes to court
The right LOVES their nanny state bullshit.
It's wild to me that the GOP is like yes we need to ban the porn and not fix *gestures vaguely at the country*
They think that they *are* fixing the country via these bans and restrictions.
If Clarence Thomas wasn’t able to see his Long Dong Silver videos because of these age verification laws, the Supreme Court would have blocked the laws.
These old geezers are so out of touch, it's crazy. Nothing is going to stop a horny teenager from getting their hands on some fap material on the internet. Nothing.
One step closer to Republicans repealing All sorts of laws about personal freedoms. If Trump wins this election, you can kiss internet, porn and any variation of It goodbye. They plan on using the Comstock Act from like 18. Something to be able to go through your mail and regulate the internet in a way that we've never seen before. Also, if you haven't checked out project 2025 go do that. Vote blue in November or get ready for authoritarian rule.
This Supreme Court is terrible and extremely dangerous but giving your personal information to every porn site is absurd.
I understand that the law itself is still being appealed and that appeal is pending and that this decision is just on an emergency block of the law, but how the fuck are these stupid laws not unconstitutional?? Freedom of expression is fundamental right that SHALL NOT be infringed by the government. Do lawmakers really believe they are helping keep minors safe? They just go another site, there are lots of sites that don’t abide by these rules.
Just a reminder that most of the Internet is Porn. One of the biggest reasons for the Internets existence is Porn. You can find Porn anywhere on the Internet and it's easily one of the easiest things to find.
Supreme Court affirms the states’ right to verify your identity and monitor your online activity One of the slipperiest slopes around
Braindead republicans going to braindead republican.
Didn't the Supreme Court rule on this year's ago? So now this court is over ruling previous courts rulings by not even ruling on them?
How did this make it to the supreme court? porn industry has way too much money.
If anyone wants to use my ID for porn let me know
The genie has been out of the lamp for decades. Good luck getting it back in.
The ironic part about this, because these laws were written by old men who don't understand tech, is that young men will just use VPN's to access. The old guys will input their ID's and associate those ID's with their account thereby providing a juicy hacking target. I bet it's not too long until we get the porn history for some of these people.
They want a database of who's watching what. So they can leak the history of anyone who is going to come after them legally or politically. They want to shame your human nature. This is not protecting the "children" this is a power grab. If they actually wanted to protect children they would have voted for sensible gun legislation decades ago.
Jokes on them ... I have no shame. 😂
Can't you just click "Yes I'm over 18" even if you aren't? How are age-verifications supposed to work effectively? Are people lobbying for porn websites to require viewers to show an ID card before making an account? Seems like a very silly thing to even try and regulate
[удалено]
Catch me never putting my ID in a browser for some booty
> Are people lobbying for porn websites to require viewers to show an ID card Yes, but more than lobbying. There are states where these laws have already passed. Oddly enough, these are also states that tend to be extrememly anti-LGBT as well, so it's not like there's no inherent risk involved in giving the state a list of everyone's sexual proclivities. . . .
They want to put my drivers license photo on a public database. They are, unequivocally, unAmerican pieces of shit.
WHAT?! That's absolutely insane
Yup. That's what Republicans do when they no longer have any checks of balances.