161–170 of 186 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's neither pointless nor virtue signaling. I'm not Mormon, but it's commonly understood that Utah is an LDS state and follows LDS beliefs.
If only there was a reason state governments couldn’t legislate religious doctrine...
I'm gonna do some research on my own after I'm done with work, but if that point is being pushed so much it needs proof.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has probably more to do with the Morman church in Utah than the GOP.
(FYI it's Mormon*, named after the Book of Mormon) However, (also FYI), adherents prefer if you refer to the church as "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" and members of said church "Latter-day Saints" or simply "Christians". I know "Mormon" is a long-standing nickname and most people don't intend to use the term derogatorily, but calling Latter-day Saints "Mormons" is like nicknaming Muslims "Mohammeds…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, sure, I understand the concern of having children be protected from things they aren't ready for... ...but is the government mandating this the best way to go about it? Is this implementation even sound?
What's the alternative? There seem to be obvious negative externalities which the promulgating industries seem disincentivized to address...seems to be a legitimate basis for government intervention. *Not necessarily agreeing with the proposed solution here of a mandated approach. Just saying that this may be a situation where government intervention is necessary even if it's just to sponsor public education of optio…
My opinion (and strictly an opinion) is if diverse types of information are more readily available you can either lock down your child's access to that information OR you can prepare them for what they might encounter. Separately its also good to guide them on access and responsible use of the world's knowledge (good, bad, moral, immoral) which is literally at their fingertips
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have a hard time referring to them as Christians when they think that the non-Latter-Day Christians are someone that needs converted. Most Christian groups think that “Christians” outside of their group need to be converted. There are theological reasons why large groups of Christians exclude LDS, SDA, JW, and certain other groups that self-identify as “Christian” from the scope of that term (while still includin…
I think I know why you're saying that, but at least in Texas most people who identify as Christian aren't really aware of the differences between groups. If one believes that Jesus is God, it doesn't matter if they even go to church at all, or if they go to evangelical or Catholic services. It's all considered Christian, and social circles often include people from vastly different denominations.
> “One of the most difficult challenges I work with are the effects from pornography,” Gibson said. “Average age of first exposure, which is often accidental, is 10 to 11 years old. Anything we can do to help prevent that puts us in a proactive rather than a defensive position. I'm sure many of us can confirm exposure at such a young age. My friends and I were all exposed around that age. I hate the fact that I was e…
To me it seems like overreach, a government solution trying to pile on to a problem that already has a private solution. Restrictive filtering and content management software exists and is easily accessible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think I know why you're saying that, but at least in Texas most people who identify as Christian aren't really aware of the differences between groups. If one believes that Jesus is God, it doesn't matter if they even go to church at all, or if they go to evangelical or Catholic services. It's all considered Christian, and social circles often include people from vastly different denominations.
Most Christian groups don't focus on converting other Christian groups. That doesn't mean they don't know the difference between Catholic and Protestant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
r/animetitties on Reddit is pretty good for news with the US filtered out. Yes the name seems weird - it’s not a joke.
alright, so I took you at your word here. I dunno what I expected: but what I got was a face full of anime titties. which I'm not even opposed to in principle but: c'mon man.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No thanks, I’d prefer one state’s extremist religious inclinations not tank liberty for everyone else. They can monitor their own phones and their own computers and leave everyone else’s alone.
Why would this affect other states? Isn't this legislation specific to Utah?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But when a right enables suffering and wrongdoing on a large scale, it's time to rethink that right Counter argument - alcohol? Right to buy and drink booze enables suffering and wrongdoing on a large scale, but banning it was a disaster. Maybe something like regulating marketing would be more effective, but an outright ban would not work. At any rate, I don't deny porn can be addictive and have negative effects fo…
> If you want to block pornography in your household, setup a pi hole and grab a blocklist from GitHub that has the top million porn domains. In my case, this would have done very little. A child gets exposed to pornography at friends' houses and at school. Once you're hooked, filters are pretty easy to work around.