A Utah senator has introduced a bill that would essentially ban online porn in the USA, citing it being obscene. The First Amendment is not protected by items being deemed obscene.

https://www.wfla.com/news/politics/utah ... orn-in-us/

Cause banning alcohol went so well the last time they tried it.

Go get 'em Hoss!

Moron... sex, and watching sex, is not obscene.

Tugg

Dear Utah: stop wasting my federal tax dollars with your weird fuddy-duddy bills.

- Signed Resident in Another State

PS: what happened to states' rights?

SEAorPWM wrote:

Dear Utah: stop wasting my federal tax dollars with your weird fuddy-duddy bills.

- Signed Resident in Another State

PS: what happened to states' rights?

Isn't it illegal to sell "adult novelties" in AL and OK? I have not been there for a while, but I remember billboards on the 215 advertising "gentlemen's clubs". I also find it hilarious Utah is next to Nevada. Still, this bill will never go anywhere ever.

You know why they say… write what you know.

Didn’t Pornhub data reveal the most kinky searches are in blue states but the most time spent consuming porn is in red states?

Newark727 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Didn’t Pornhub data reveal the most kinky searches are in blue states but the most time spent consuming porn is in red states?

I'm sure somebody is keeping track somewhere, but I feel like most of the "here's every state's preferred porn consumption" images floating around the internet are just made up for clicks.

Probably so but I recall Pornhub was actually regularly releasing annual data dives, at least before the pandemic.

Aaron747 wrote:

Didn’t Pornhub data reveal the most kinky searches are in blue states but the most time spent consuming porn is in red states?

The state of Louisiana recently enacted a requirement for government ID input to adult sites. That IMO is the way to go.

Aaron747 wrote:

Newark727 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Didn’t Pornhub data reveal the most kinky searches are in blue states but the most time spent consuming porn is in red states?

I'm sure somebody is keeping track somewhere, but I feel like most of the "here's every state's preferred porn consumption" images floating around the internet are just made up for clicks.

Probably so but I recall Pornhub was actually regularly releasing annual data dives, at least before the pandemic.

I thought they still did the survey during the pandemic? IIRC, it was about the same.

phatfarmlines wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Didn’t Pornhub data reveal the most kinky searches are in blue states but the most time spent consuming porn is in red states?

The state of Louisiana recently enacted a requirement for government ID input to adult sites. That IMO is the way to go.

15 yo boy: Hey dad? I need to copy your ID for our school's emergency contact information. Let me take it in the morning.

yeah, so well....

It would also give the state the incredible power to know exactly who is watching exactly what. Why does it matter what type of adult porn adults are watching?

Nevermind that this is DOA in the Senate, define "excessive interest in sexual matters." Senator Lee is most likely performing to appease a high dollar donor. The reality is also that porn is big dollar -- its producers will buy enough Senators to kill this.

Senator promises dumb mega donor that he will introduce legifslation that 'Has a very small chance' of getting voted for. Senator gets donations, introduces legilation, profit.

Welcome to America. Prositution to the higherst bidder. Senate Style.

casinterest wrote:

Senator promises dumb mega donor that he will introduce legislation that 'Has a very small chance' of getting voted for. Senator gets donations, introduces legislation, profit.
Welcome to America. Prostitution to the highest bidder. Senate Style.

Sadly that is the truth. I have more respect for a porn performer that for most politicians. So you make porn illegal in the USA. So what, people will use VPN's set in another country, go to the 'dark web' with less regulation as to banning access to child porn and taking away tax revenues.

ltbewr wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Senator promises dumb mega donor that he will introduce legislation that 'Has a very small chance' of getting voted for. Senator gets donations, introduces legislation, profit.
Welcome to America. Prostitution to the highest bidder. Senate Style.

Sadly that is the truth. I have more respect for a porn performer that for most politicians. So you make porn illegal in the USA. So what, people will use VPN's set in another country, go to the 'dark web' with less regulation as to banning access to child porn and taking away tax revenues.

The real issue here is how Citizen's United makes this all more likely. The PACs are funded in large part by large mega donors that overuse their one person one vote influence to enrich politicians and destroy democracy.

casinterest wrote:

Senator promises dumb mega donor that he will introduce legifslation that 'Has a very small chance' of getting voted for. Senator gets donations, introduces legilation, profit.

Welcome to America. Prositution to the higherst bidder. Senate Style.

I'm pretty sure prostitution is illegal in Utah...

seb146 wrote:

15 yo boy: Hey dad? I need to copy your ID for our school's emergency contact information. Let me take it in the morning

That is something I would expect a Boomer (grand)parent to fall for. A responsible GenX/Millenial parent who is aware of the law, not so much.

But you bring up a good point. These age checks are never foolproof, just like carding for cigarettes and alcohol isn't foolproof, but many will argue why we have those checks for cigs/alcohol but not for online adult sites.

seb146 wrote:

It would also give the state the incredible power to know exactly who is watching exactly what. Why does it matter what type of adult porn adults are watching?

As if the government can't query who looks at what online via I.P. address..... (and I don't think VPNing is
all foolproof either).

Airontario wrote:

Cause banning alcohol went so well the last time they tried it.

Noting that you are probably Canadian and have seen our new Alcohol guidelines I could see at attempt to ban it again. The problem is that the more time and time goes on the more people forget history.
FYI for anyone who doesn't know. Canada is basically saying that no level of alcohol is safe and everyone is basically laughing at this as we are a drinking nation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/18/worl ... lines.html

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

A Utah senator has introduced a bill that would essentially ban online porn in the USA, citing it being obscene. The First Amendment is not protected by items being deemed obscene.

https://www.wfla.com/news/politics/utah ... orn-in-us/

It is very obscene actually, doesn't mean it should be banned though.

It doesn't need to be banned but a more detailed disclaimer that clearly says that this is not indicative of real sex and that overconsumption of porn can have serious negative effects on your perception of sex and your sex drive.

Aaron747 wrote:

Didn’t Pornhub data reveal the most kinky searches are in blue states but the most time spent consuming porn is in red states?

I have seen IG pages like Fanmaps and others that will show the most searched category in each state. I am going of memory but a lot of people like MILF and step-siblings.

phatfarmlines wrote:

seb146 wrote:

15 yo boy: Hey dad? I need to copy your ID for our school's emergency contact information. Let me take it in the morning

That is something I would expect a Boomer (grand)parent to fall for. A responsible GenX/Millenial parent who is aware of the law, not so much.

But you bring up a good point. These age checks are never foolproof, just like carding for cigarettes and alcohol isn't foolproof, but many will argue why we have those checks for cigs/alcohol but not for online adult sites.

Several places around here (deeply MAGA territory) simply scan the bar code on the back of my drivers license and can also use a UV light to ensure it is a legit license. The "adult" web sites I have seen simply say "click here if you are over 18" but no UV light or bar code scanner. So then what?

phatfarmlines wrote:

seb146 wrote:

It would also give the state the incredible power to know exactly who is watching exactly what. Why does it matter what type of adult porn adults are watching?

As if the government can't query who looks at what online via I.P. address..... (and I don't think VPNing is
all foolproof either).

And? Consenting adults watching consenting adults do adult things is... legal. Others may not like it but so what?

To me, porn is like music. Some of us like Linkin Park, some of us like Stravinsky, some of us like ZRO, some of us like Hank Senior, some of us like Glenn Miller.... We all like basically the same thing. There should be a healthy respect and a healthy dose of "meh..." for adults adulting with other adults.

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

A Utah senator has introduced a bill that would essentially ban online porn in the USA, citing it being obscene. The First Amendment is not protected by items being deemed obscene.

https://www.wfla.com/news/politics/utah ... orn-in-us/

I am going on record as not supporting this whatsoever.

ltbewr wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Senator promises dumb mega donor that he will introduce legislation that 'Has a very small chance' of getting voted for. Senator gets donations, introduces legislation, profit.
Welcome to America. Prostitution to the highest bidder. Senate Style.

Sadly that is the truth. I have more respect for a porn performer that for most politicians. So you make porn illegal in the USA. So what, people will use VPN's set in another country, go to the 'dark web' with less regulation as to banning access to child porn and taking away tax revenues.

Yes, the actor is earning his money the hard way

phatfarmlines wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Didn’t Pornhub data reveal the most kinky searches are in blue states but the most time spent consuming porn is in red states?

The state of Louisiana recently enacted a requirement for government ID input to adult sites. That IMO is the way to go.

Sounds like a classic case of Big Government overreach. I wonder how much this system cost to implement?

Also, they should have set the age to 17, since 17 is considered an adult in that state.

This Louisiana Big Brother garbage is effectively denying "adult" citizens their rights.

seb146 wrote:

phatfarmlines wrote:

seb146 wrote:

15 yo boy: Hey dad? I need to copy your ID for our school's emergency contact information. Let me take it in the morning

That is something I would expect a Boomer (grand)parent to fall for. A responsible GenX/Millenial parent who is aware of the law, not so much.

But you bring up a good point. These age checks are never foolproof, just like carding for cigarettes and alcohol isn't foolproof, but many will argue why we have those checks for cigs/alcohol but not for online adult sites.

Several places around here (deeply MAGA territory) simply scan the bar code on the back of my drivers license and can also use a UV light to ensure it is a legit license. The "adult" web sites I have seen simply say "click here if you are over 18" but no UV light or bar code scanner. So then what?

phatfarmlines wrote:

seb146 wrote:

It would also give the state the incredible power to know exactly who is watching exactly what. Why does it matter what type of adult porn adults are watching?

As if the government can't query who looks at what online via I.P. address..... (and I don't think VPNing is
all foolproof either).

And? Consenting adults watching consenting adults do adult things is... legal. Others may not like it but so what?

To me, porn is like music. Some of us like Linkin Park, some of us like Stravinsky, some of us like ZRO, some of us like Hank Senior, some of us like Glenn Miller.... We all like basically the same thing. There should be a healthy respect and a healthy dose of "meh..." for adults adulting with other adults.

I suppose the key is in the content of the porn;

Are both parties human;
Did both parties consent;
Are both parties adult;
The level of violence in the content. My understanding is that repeated exposure to violent content will desensitise the viewer and likely increase the level of violence in society generally.

..and history repeats itself.

Saint Reagan (sole responsible party for shuttering all federal Psychiatric Treatment Facilities coast to coast to impress with a reduced budget resulting in the millions of unstable homeless you see today because the Tricklw down economics collected those dollars which ended up triggering the Rich getting Richer M.O. in the works since..but on steroids now.) unleashed his AG Ed Meese to go after porn with a vengeance..where he encounter Hustler Magazine publisher Larry Flynt who kicked butt in his landmark case.


So here we go again, a sexually retarded, sexually insecure middle aged senator wants re-ignite a 'fought and lost battle' over who should be watching 'what' in private.

He will fail and this effort attached to his and families name sake for generations to come.

You have to understand human sexuality to attack it and win successfully...he's a galaxy or two away from being ready to 'go there'.


BN747

BN747 wrote:

..and history repeats itself.

Saint Reagan (sole responsible party for shuttering all federal Psychiatric Treatment Facilities coast to coast to impress with a reduced budget resulting in the millions of unstable homeless you see today because the Tricklw down economics collected those dollars which ended up triggering the Rich getting Richer M.O. in the works since..but on steroids now.) unleashed his AG Ed Meese to go after porn with a vengeance..where he encounter Hustler Magazine publisher Larry Flynt who kicked butt in his landmark case.


So here we go again, a sexually retarded, sexually insecure middle aged senator wants re-ignite a 'fought and lost battle' over who should be watching 'what' in private.

He will fail and this effort attached to his and families name sake for generations to come.

You have to understand human sexuality to attack it and win successfully...he's a galaxy or two away from being ready to 'go there'.


BN747

The difference between the Reagan era and now is that in the intervening time, the SC has been stacked with staunch conservatives intent on promoting conservative values. There is a reason the Christian fundamentalists are going after previous rulings and making a renewed push towards establishing a society rigidly dictated by a sort of Christian sharia... They now have the Supreme Court on their side.

bennett123 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

phatfarmlines wrote:

That is something I would expect a Boomer (grand)parent to fall for. A responsible GenX/Millenial parent who is aware of the law, not so much.

But you bring up a good point. These age checks are never foolproof, just like carding for cigarettes and alcohol isn't foolproof, but many will argue why we have those checks for cigs/alcohol but not for online adult sites.

Several places around here (deeply MAGA territory) simply scan the bar code on the back of my drivers license and can also use a UV light to ensure it is a legit license. The "adult" web sites I have seen simply say "click here if you are over 18" but no UV light or bar code scanner. So then what?

phatfarmlines wrote:

As if the government can't query who looks at what online via I.P. address..... (and I don't think VPNing is
all foolproof either).

And? Consenting adults watching consenting adults do adult things is... legal. Others may not like it but so what?

To me, porn is like music. Some of us like Linkin Park, some of us like Stravinsky, some of us like ZRO, some of us like Hank Senior, some of us like Glenn Miller.... We all like basically the same thing. There should be a healthy respect and a healthy dose of "meh..." for adults adulting with other adults.

I suppose the key is in the content of the porn;

Are both parties human;
Did both parties consent;
Are both parties adult;
The level of violence in the content. My understanding is that repeated exposure to violent content will desensitise the viewer and likely increase the level of violence in society generally.

"Adult" has several different definitions in the US and many other countries. Therefore, I don't see how any of this makes sense.

They should ban all this wizardry of the Internet I say!

After all it is that which the government cannot control and is spreading this nakedry.
There should be checks already on the portal used to get into this wizardry (aka computer).
[/sarcasm]

bennett123 wrote:

Did both parties consent;
Are both parties adult;

How will you ever know if this is the case?

A friend told me there's often more than two parties involved.

SEAorPWM wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Several places around here (deeply MAGA territory) simply scan the bar code on the back of my drivers license and can also use a UV light to ensure it is a legit license. The "adult" web sites I have seen simply say "click here if you are over 18" but no UV light or bar code scanner. So then what?



And? Consenting adults watching consenting adults do adult things is... legal. Others may not like it but so what?

To me, porn is like music. Some of us like Linkin Park, some of us like Stravinsky, some of us like ZRO, some of us like Hank Senior, some of us like Glenn Miller.... We all like basically the same thing. There should be a healthy respect and a healthy dose of "meh..." for adults adulting with other adults.

I suppose the key is in the content of the porn;

Are both parties human;
Did both parties consent;
Are both parties adult;
The level of violence in the content. My understanding is that repeated exposure to violent content will desensitise the viewer and likely increase the level of violence in society generally.

"Adult" has several different definitions in the US and many other countries. Therefore, I don't see how any of this makes sense.

I have never thought about looking at porn outside the United States, so I can not speak to that. But, I do know that mainstream content providers in the United States do their due diligence when posting content. That is: they make sure everyone is consenting and also adult (at least 18). There are shady sites out there and I get going after them.

As pointed out up the thread, making it illegal will just create problems. More than there are now, just like we tried with prohibition.

SEAorPWM wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Several places around here (deeply MAGA territory) simply scan the bar code on the back of my drivers license and can also use a UV light to ensure it is a legit license. The "adult" web sites I have seen simply say "click here if you are over 18" but no UV light or bar code scanner. So then what?



And? Consenting adults watching consenting adults do adult things is... legal. Others may not like it but so what?

To me, porn is like music. Some of us like Linkin Park, some of us like Stravinsky, some of us like ZRO, some of us like Hank Senior, some of us like Glenn Miller.... We all like basically the same thing. There should be a healthy respect and a healthy dose of "meh..." for adults adulting with other adults.

I suppose the key is in the content of the porn;

Are both parties human;
Did both parties consent;
Are both parties adult;
The level of violence in the content. My understanding is that repeated exposure to violent content will desensitise the viewer and likely increase the level of violence in society generally.

"Adult" has several different definitions in the US and many other countries. Therefore, I don't see how any of this makes sense.

My point is that describing porn as consenting adults watching consenting adults do adult things makes numerous assumptions.

Also exposure to violent content is likely to normalise violence.

Something that would be viewed as shocking/horrible no longer shocks.

Given the level of violent crime society has a stake here.

If you want to tackle violence I'm not sure porn is the obvious target...

I do think porn should have a bit more regulation, in particular regarding the contracts performers sign. If a girl decides she no longer wants to be in the industry, not only doesn't she have any control over the videos, but she's not earning anything from them either. It shouldn't be possible, if the content keeps being watched, she should keep earning something.

Nothing to do with banning the stuff, though.

cskok8 wrote:

Yes, the actor is earning his money the hard way

I see what you did there!
So the left wants my guns and the right wants my porn and I'm not giving up either one.

johns624 wrote:

cskok8 wrote:

Yes, the actor is earning his money the hard way

I see what you did there!
So the left wants my guns and the right wants my porn and I'm not giving up either one.

Both can relieve stress when used properly for recreation. Almost any medical professional will say so.

Aesma wrote:

If you want to tackle violence I'm not sure porn is the obvious target...

I do think porn should have a bit more regulation, in particular regarding the contracts performers sign. If a girl decides she no longer wants to be in the industry, not only doesn't she have any control over the videos, but she's not earning anything from them either. It shouldn't be possible, if the content keeps being watched, she should keep earning something.

Nothing to do with banning the stuff, though.

IIRC that was how it used to be before the advent of the internet it really was the film industry and just different films and heavily regulated. I know California made a stink in the industry demanding condoms be used (some actresses contracted HIV I recall) and that along with the advent of the internet made it very decentralized where a lot of those in the industry can be exploited.

Porn to the user is like any drug and its usually fine in moderation but heavy use does have consequences.

Aesma wrote:

If you want to tackle violence I'm not sure porn is the obvious target...

I do think porn should have a bit more regulation, in particular regarding the contracts performers sign. If a girl decides she no longer wants to be in the industry, not only doesn't she have any control over the videos, but she's not earning anything from them either. It shouldn't be possible, if the content keeps being watched, she should keep earning something.

Nothing to do with banning the stuff, though.

Depends what type of porn you are referring to.

There is quite a wide variety.

bennett123 wrote:

SEAorPWM wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

I suppose the key is in the content of the porn;

Are both parties human;
Did both parties consent;
Are both parties adult;
The level of violence in the content. My understanding is that repeated exposure to violent content will desensitise the viewer and likely increase the level of violence in society generally.

"Adult" has several different definitions in the US and many other countries. Therefore, I don't see how any of this makes sense.

My point is that describing porn as consenting adults watching consenting adults do adult things makes numerous assumptions.

Also exposure to violent content is likely to normalise violence.

Something that would be viewed as shocking/horrible no longer shocks.

Given the level of violent crime society has a stake here.

Violence is not all about porn. The majority of violence is about drugs and mental illness. How many people watch porn and never ever in any way in a million years beat their partner? It happens, but not to the degree you think. It is much, much, much, M-U-C-H!!!! less. Yes, it happens. Just like white men murder for no reason. A nod to another thread. The point is: don't jump to conclusions.

Maybe, just maybe, we need affordable health care

INCLUDING MENTAL HEALTH CARE!!!!!

in this country.

seb146 wrote:

SEAorPWM wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

I suppose the key is in the content of the porn;

Are both parties human;
Did both parties consent;
Are both parties adult;
The level of violence in the content. My understanding is that repeated exposure to violent content will desensitise the viewer and likely increase the level of violence in society generally.

"Adult" has several different definitions in the US and many other countries. Therefore, I don't see how any of this makes sense.

I have never thought about looking at porn outside the United States, so I can not speak to that. But, I do know that mainstream content providers in the United States do their due diligence when posting content. That is: they make sure everyone is consenting and also adult (at least 18). There are shady sites out there and I get going after them.

As pointed out up the thread, making it illegal will just create problems. More than there are now, just like we tried with prohibition.

Even within the US there is a five year gray period from "childhood" to "adulthood" from 16 to 21.
If Texas, Louisiana, and Wisconsin house 17 year olds charged with misdemeanors with older sex offenders in their state jails, who cares if 17 year olds can view porn!

Nation of dumb priorities

Aesma wrote:

If you want to tackle violence I'm not sure porn is the obvious target...

I do think porn should have a bit more regulation, in particular regarding the contracts performers sign. If a girl decides she no longer wants to be in the industry, not only doesn't she have any control over the videos, but she's not earning anything from them either. It shouldn't be possible, if the content keeps being watched, she should keep earning something.

Nothing to do with banning the stuff, though.

Very well said..the performers do need better protections of their images/imagery just as stringent as YouTube's copyright violation protections of content.

Pay those people.


BN747

seb146 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

SEAorPWM wrote:

"Adult" has several different definitions in the US and many other countries. Therefore, I don't see how any of this makes sense.

My point is that describing porn as consenting adults watching consenting adults do adult things makes numerous assumptions.

Also exposure to violent content is likely to normalise violence.

Something that would be viewed as shocking/horrible no longer shocks.

Given the level of violent crime society has a stake here.

Violence is not all about porn. The majority of violence is about drugs and mental illness. How many people watch porn and never ever in any way in a million years beat their partner? It happens, but not to the degree you think. It is much, much, much, M-U-C-H!!!! less. Yes, it happens. Just like white men murder for no reason. A nod to another thread. The point is: don't jump to conclusions.

Maybe, just maybe, we need affordable health care

INCLUDING MENTAL HEALTH CARE!!!!!

in this country.

I did not suggest that violence is all about porn.

However, this topic is about porn rather than health care.

bennett123 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

My point is that describing porn as consenting adults watching consenting adults do adult things makes numerous assumptions.

Also exposure to violent content is likely to normalise violence.

Something that would be viewed as shocking/horrible no longer shocks.

Given the level of violent crime society has a stake here.

Violence is not all about porn. The majority of violence is about drugs and mental illness. How many people watch porn and never ever in any way in a million years beat their partner? It happens, but not to the degree you think. It is much, much, much, M-U-C-H!!!! less. Yes, it happens. Just like white men murder for no reason. A nod to another thread. The point is: don't jump to conclusions.

Maybe, just maybe, we need affordable health care

INCLUDING MENTAL HEALTH CARE!!!!!

in this country.

I did not suggest that violence is all about porn.

However, this topic is about porn rather than health care.

You brought up the violence angle. Yes, that is something that happens, just not for everyone. People become violent for many reasons, including addiction and mental illness. That is where affordable health care comes in.

That reminded me this map:

The fine print text on the bottom left corner claim that pornography are covered by the First Amendment in the US according to Supreme Court ruling in year 2002

Aesma wrote:

If you want to tackle violence I'm not sure porn is the obvious target...

I do think porn should have a bit more regulation, in particular regarding the contracts performers sign. If a girl decides she no longer wants to be in the industry, not only doesn't she have any control over the videos, but she's not earning anything from them either. It shouldn't be possible, if the content keeps being watched, she should keep earning something.

Nothing to do with banning the stuff, though.

Control is one thing given nature of porn, but when it come to earning how are they different from actor of ordinary content?

c933103 wrote:

That reminded me this map:

The fine print text on the bottom left corner claim that pornography are covered by the First Amendment in the US according to Supreme Court ruling in year 2002

Lolicon is just plain weird... that said, I could care less if some 17 year old wants to get involved in porn. Americans want to treat 17 year olds as adults for everything else, so why not this. Time for some consistency.

SEAorPWM wrote:

Americans want to treat 17 year olds as adults for everything else, so why not this. Time for some consistency.

But not for a beer?

scbriml wrote:

SEAorPWM wrote:

Americans want to treat 17 year olds as adults for everything else, so why not this. Time for some consistency.

But not for a beer?

Well, if we're going for consistency...

casinterest wrote:

Senator promises dumb mega donor that he will introduce legifslation that 'Has a very small chance' of getting voted for. Senator gets donations, introduces legilation, profit.

Welcome to America. Prositution to the higherst bidder. Senate Style.

The American Government system is BROKEN. Its ridiculous that two parties control everything and they are both on opposite sides of the spectrum and all they do is try to outdo each other. The world isn’t black and white, the day Americans realize this they can join the rest of the First World.

santi319 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Senator promises dumb mega donor that he will introduce legifslation that 'Has a very small chance' of getting voted for. Senator gets donations, introduces legilation, profit.

Welcome to America. Prositution to the higherst bidder. Senate Style.

The American Government system is BROKEN. Its ridiculous that two parties control everything and they are both on opposite sides of the spectrum and all they do is try to outdo each other. The world isn’t black and white, the day Americans realize this they can join the rest of the First World.

But that gets into a whole topic of trying to convince 3/5 of states to change the system and getting 537 elected officials on board. We would essential have to rewrite major parts of the Constitution. Many people do not want to do that because they would have to give up too much power.

SEAorPWM wrote:

c933103 wrote:

That reminded me this map:

The fine print text on the bottom left corner claim that pornography are covered by the First Amendment in the US according to Supreme Court ruling in year 2002

Lolicon is just plain weird... that said, I could care less if some 17 year old wants to get involved in porn. Americans want to treat 17 year olds as adults for everything else, so why not this. Time for some consistency.

I had to look up what "lolicon" means. Interesting it is partly legal in Utah but completely illegal in Colorado and Nevada.

seb146 wrote:

But that gets into a whole topic of trying to convince 3/5 of states to change the system and getting 537 elected officials on board. We would essential have to rewrite major parts of the Constitution. Many people do not want to do that because they would have to give up too much power.

Another debacle is why some countries are following constitutions that were written 300 years ago..

We want to believe we have evolved as humans, but going by that… ridiculous