531–540 of 1001 posts
[flagged]
If the Supreme Court agrees they are constitutional then they clearly are constitutional, unless you think the constitution doesn’t apply
The reinterpretation of the Commerce Clause was the start of a downward spiral.
I'm hoping the Convention of States will succeed and fix this, even if it means rebuilding many institutions at the State level.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the Supreme Court agrees they are constitutional then they clearly are constitutional, unless you think the constitution doesn’t apply
We've drifted pretty far from the Constitution and what the Founders envisioned. The reinterpretation of the Commerce Clause was the start of a downward spiral. I'm hoping the Convention of States will succeed and fix this, even if it means rebuilding many institutions at the State level.
when will that happen?
Or is it because, as others have mentioned, it’s not really about protecting minors from adult content?
All these ID check laws are out of hand. Parents are expecting the government, and random websites, to raise their kids. Why would anyone trust some random blog with their ID? If these laws move forward (and I don’t think they should), there needs to be a way to authenticate as over 18 without sending picture of your ID off to random 3rd parties, or giving actual personal details. I don’t want to give this data, and…
*Also, I can’t wait for the first lawsuit over a breastfeeding page, because you know it’s coming.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The slippery slope from here to banning under 18s looking at websites discussing suicidal thoughts, transgender issues, homosexually and onto anything some group of middle age mothers decide isn't appropriate seems dangerously anti-fallacitical.
While I completely understand the slippery slope concept, we ban all kinds of things for under 18s based on morals. Why couldn't these be any different? How else does a society decide as a whole what they are for or against. Obviously, there should be limits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So majority chooses what healthcare options are available? You sound surprised, so maybe you really don't know this: this state of affairs is how it's always been, and is likely to continue well into the future. The government regulates all medicines, all medical procedures, and all medical practices. It's literally one of the many jobs of government.
Government run did not always mean majority ruled. Many times rights of the minority have been ruled to be important, as in cases like abortion. In today’s US, we’re trending toward enforcing minority opinions about e.g. vaccines.
Right.
> Many times rights of the minority have been ruled to be important, as in cases like abortion.
Correct, but it was with the agreement of the majority of voters! IOW, the majority opinion still prevailed.
We are not talking about tyranny of the minority by the majority; your example is literally the majority agreeing that those specific minorities rights be granted to them.
TBH, the opposition that we are seeing is opposition to medical intervention on minors who by definition alone cannot give informed consent.
Stop fighting that battle and I guarantee that this entire "issue" turns into a nothing-burger.
There is no reason to argue for medical interventions on someone who is unable to consent.
On a sociological level: good. I personally believe that easy-access porn has been detrimental to society.
[flagged]
To their "chagrin?" Huh? The meaning of the word is the opposite of whatever you're trying to communicate, I think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The question is always “whose morals”. I think society as a whole is in agreement that minors are better off without access to pornography, for example. But the arrangement OP is outlining is one where a minority are able to force their morality on a broader population that doesn’t agree with it.
You might be wrong there. While the majority does not oppose homosexual relationships they are against affirmative transgender treatments for minors.
The grandparent post didn't say "transgender treatments" they said "transgender issues."
Do you believe that the mere concept of questioning your gender identity or expression is something that should be kept from the minds of minors?