Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Supreme Court is just doing their part as a part of Project 2025 (which is about 50% accomplished already btw)
Is there a breakdown of this anywhere? ie, something that shows what was proposed in p2025 and what policies/procedures/orders have pushed a particular part of the plan forward?
Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online
861–870 of 1001 posts
Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online
#862All 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…
The pre-red-tape internet was glorious. Only way to get that back is to decentralize everything.
No entity willingly gives up control, and that is what this issue is about.
This is going to impact every book out there, creating an environment where the authors simply can't tell their stories anymore because of someone's moral shock.
Bad things happen in stories to characters, and authors need that flexibility. Its the journey in overcoming these things that makes the story good. The moment you or an author can't express reality without it being a felony, is the moment you no longer have real writers.
Some people don't write for money, and these things impose untenable cost on everyone.
Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online
#863Earlier quoted context omitted.
This doesn't destroy the first amendment any more than requiring an ID & background check to purchase a firearm destroys the second amendment. Which is to say that it might, but for exactly the same reason, so The People ultimately need to decide on a consistent choice of interpretation.
Except one person googling and watching porn has nothing to do with other people, very different from buying guns
It has as much to do with other people as buying guns does. What about the actresses in the porn content; people the world, clearly including you, so quickly forget about? The concerning number of women who are trapped into this industry, usually in third world countries, by men? What about the people on the other side of the personal relationships of individuals who consume this content; the averted gazes, their treatment of women, how that impacts their community and their children?
Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online
#864Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would call this a "legal overreach". Laws have nothing to do with morals or morality.
In an ideal world, but in this case we're dealing with moral overreach from zealous Christian nationalists.
Again, you have no requirement to recognize this form of neurotic authoritarianism as anything related to either morality or christianity, for that matter. This isn't about morals at all, it's rather nakedly about control and ignorance.
Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online
#865Earlier quoted context omitted.
Devils advocate: parents that are too busy or not tech savvy are helpless to block content without essentially forbidding their kids from using any connected device. I run a pi-hole that blocks ads and porn, but that’s way beyond the technical capability of probably 95% of people. There are some commercial products but they are expensive and also take time and at least a little tech ability to set up. … and of course…
> parents that are too busy If you are too busy to parent, then you shouldn't be one in the first place.
Just as well life is completely predictable over long time horizons making accurate judgement on this matter completely possible.
Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online
#866Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait until you hear what issues the ubiquitous dihydrogen monoxide can cause! https://web.archive.org/web/19961031232918/http://media.circ... These points would greatly benefit from being put into perspective You can't seriously think a significant percentage of people are emotionally unstable because they looked up porn of their own will at an age of their own choosing, even if I trust that it can be listed as a con…
You can’t be serious thinking it has NO bad effect on people, especially children. Would you let your own children watch porn?
[deleted]
Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online
#867Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online
#868Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except one person googling and watching porn has nothing to do with other people, very different from buying guns
It has as much to do with other people as buying guns does. What about the actresses in the porn content; people the world, clearly including you, so quickly forget about? The concerning number of women who are trapped into this industry, usually in third world countries, by men? What about the people on the other side of the personal relationships of individuals who consume this content; the averted gazes, their tre…
Asking id from the person watching porn has nothing to do with making porn illegal.
If you think it is harmful to the people doing the porn, then it should be illegal.
If not, asking for id is super useless.
Also if watching porn is bad for the person’s spouse then they shouldn’t do it, which has nothing to do with asking for id
Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online
#869Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article concludes that age verification must repeat every 60 minutes. And when there’s doubt about safe harbor, better safe than sorry. There’s a chance you’ll look back at captchas with relish.
The article starts as > Just in time for the Fourth of July, last week the Supreme Court effectively nullified the First Amendment for any writers, like me, who include sex scenes in their writing, *intended for other adults* There you have it. The author already is self-aware of the appropriateness of their creation for minors. All that's needed is an easy way for the author to click "intended for adults" on whateve…
Substack and Reddit are huge websites. What you’re talking about kills self-hosting. Ironically, your idea for regulating this reinforces the VC-driven Silicon Valley capital-intensive model and kills independent, community driven low/no-capital websites.
Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online
#870Tome to move to Tor