Biden DOJ Sides with Porn Industry's Lawsuit Against Texas's Age Verification Law

[mikegriffith1]

This is another jaw-dropping example of how far into the gutter the woke liberal mind has gone. Texas, along with many other states, requires porn sites to verify that viewers are over 18 before allowing them to access the women-degrading, soul-destroying content. You'd think that nobody but the porn industry would object to this commonsense law, this basic protection of children from viewing porn.

But, the Biden Department of Justice, along with the ACLU, has filed a "friend of the court" brief in support of the porn industry's lawsuit against the Texas law! Predictably, the porn peddlers argue that the law "overly burdens" the ability of adults to access legal porn--yeah, never mind that the "legal porn" portrays women as nothing but sex objects who can be urinated on, anally penetrated, double penetrated, slapped, tied up, etc., etc. So much for the dignity of women, hey? And never mind that the law makes it much harder for minors to access porn sites.

By the way, the Texas age verification law passed the Texas legislature with an overwhelming majority. A similar law was approved unanimously by the Kentucky legislature.

The Family Foundation Urges U.S. Supreme Court to Uphold Law Protecting Children From Online Pornography

The Family Foundation was present for oral arguments in the Free Speech Coalition v Paxton case, which concerns Texas's age verification law

www.kentuckyfamily.org

Supreme Court wrestles with Texas age-verification requirement for pornography websites

Texas and 18 other states have recently enacted laws requiring pornography websites to verify the ages of their visitors.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[Marener]

Nanny state

 

[Kondor3]

All it takes is one provision of a Law to get someone to object to it...

You can have one of the best laws ever legislated but if it has even one doubtful objectionable provision...

Somebody is going to fight it...

What substantive aspect(s) of this law do the ACLU and the DOJ and the so-called "porn industry" find objectionable? And why?

Another in an endless series of poster children for Clean Legislative Bills?

 

[jackflash]

This is another jaw-dropping example of how far into the gutter the woke liberal mind has gone. Texas, along with many other states, requires porn sites to verify that viewers are over 18 before allowing them to access the women-degrading, soul-destroying content. You'd think that nobody but the porn industry would object to this commonsense law, this basic protection of children from viewing porn.

But, the Biden Department of Justice, along with the ACLU, has filed a "friend of the court" brief in support of the porn industry's lawsuit against the Texas law! Predictably, the porn peddlers argue that the law "overly burdens" the ability of adults to access legal porn--yeah, never mind that the "legal porn" portrays women as nothing but sex objects who can be urinated on, anally penetrated, double penetrated, slapped, tied up, etc., etc. So much for the dignity of women, hey? And never mind that the law makes it much harder for minors to access porn sites.

By the way, the Texas age verification law passed the Texas legislature with an overwhelming majority. A similar law was approved unanimously by the Kentucky legislature.

The Family Foundation Urges U.S. Supreme Court to Uphold Law Protecting Children From Online Pornography

The Family Foundation was present for oral arguments in the Free Speech Coalition v Paxton case, which concerns Texas's age verification law

www.kentuckyfamily.org

Supreme Court wrestles with Texas age-verification requirement for pornography websites

Texas and 18 other states have recently enacted laws requiring pornography websites to verify the ages of their visitors.

www.cbsnews.com

The porno industry has our young bucks zeroed, they always have.

 

[Cellblock2429]

This is another jaw-dropping example of how far into the gutter the woke liberal mind has gone. Texas, along with many other states, requires porn sites to verify that viewers are over 18 before allowing them to access the women-degrading, soul-destroying content. You'd think that nobody but the porn industry would object to this commonsense law, this basic protection of children from viewing porn.

But, the Biden Department of Justice, along with the ACLU, has filed a "friend of the court" brief in support of the porn industry's lawsuit against the Texas law! Predictably, the porn peddlers argue that the law "overly burdens" the ability of adults to access legal porn--yeah, never mind that the "legal porn" portrays women as nothing but sex objects who can be urinated on, anally penetrated, double penetrated, slapped, tied up, etc., etc. So much for the dignity of women, hey? And never mind that the law makes it much harder for minors to access porn sites.

By the way, the Texas age verification law passed the Texas legislature with an overwhelming majority. A similar law was approved unanimously by the Kentucky legislature.

The Family Foundation Urges U.S. Supreme Court to Uphold Law Protecting Children From Online Pornography

The Family Foundation was present for oral arguments in the Free Speech Coalition v Paxton case, which concerns Texas's age verification law

www.kentuckyfamily.org

Supreme Court wrestles with Texas age-verification requirement for pornography websites

Texas and 18 other states have recently enacted laws requiring pornography websites to verify the ages of their visitors.

www.cbsnews.com

;, /----/ The nightmare ends in 100 hours.

 

[pknopp]

All it takes is one provision of a Law to get someone to object to it...

You can have one of the best laws ever legislated but if it has even one doubtful objectionable provision...

Somebody is going to fight it...

What substantive aspect(s) of this law do the ACLU and the DOJ and the so-called "porn industry" find objectionable? And why?

Another in an endless series of poster children for Clean Legislative Bills?

They argued back when the Supreme Court tossed this before that it's up to the parents to monitor kids, not the state's.

As noted, some clamor for a nanny state.

 

[TNHarley]

I am about as far right as you can go, and i support states doing this. All you have to do is take your freaking picture or something. And then you dont have to worry about it ever again.
Kids can pull this shit up in school FFS.
Porn is hard to get for minors everywhere but the internet? Come on.

 

[pknopp]

I am about as far right as you can go, and i support states doing this. All you have to do is take your freaking picture or something. And then you dont have to worry about it ever again.
Kids can pull this shit up in school FFS.
Porn is hard to get for minors everywhere but the internet? Come on.

Porn was never hard to get. Parents can install filters on their kids computers and phones.

 

[Independent thinker]

This is another jaw-dropping example of how far into the gutter the woke liberal mind has gone. Texas, along with many other states, requires porn sites to verify that viewers are over 18 before allowing them to access the women-degrading, soul-destroying content. You'd think that nobody but the porn industry would object to this commonsense law, this basic protection of children from viewing porn.

But, the Biden Department of Justice, along with the ACLU, has filed a "friend of the court" brief in support of the porn industry's lawsuit against the Texas law! Predictably, the porn peddlers argue that the law "overly burdens" the ability of adults to access legal porn--yeah, never mind that the "legal porn" portrays women as nothing but sex objects who can be urinated on, anally penetrated, double penetrated, slapped, tied up, etc., etc. So much for the dignity of women, hey? And never mind that the law makes it much harder for minors to access porn sites.

By the way, the Texas age verification law passed the Texas legislature with an overwhelming majority. A similar law was approved unanimously by the Kentucky legislature.

The Family Foundation Urges U.S. Supreme Court to Uphold Law Protecting Children From Online Pornography

The Family Foundation was present for oral arguments in the Free Speech Coalition v Paxton case, which concerns Texas's age verification law

www.kentuckyfamily.org

Supreme Court wrestles with Texas age-verification requirement for pornography websites

Texas and 18 other states have recently enacted laws requiring pornography websites to verify the ages of their visitors.

www.cbsnews.com

I can actually see the objection to requiring proof of age for this. It's like a registration process, sort of like guns. The government wants your ID and for you to be on a registration list. I'm pretty sure the right would be against a registration list for everyone who owns guns, and, you have to be a certain age to buy a gun, meaning that the government could require you to be in a registration data base whenever you buy guns or ammo. While it's a good idea to not let minors buy guns, like minors viewing porn, I don't think we want the government having a registration list of everyone viewing porn or buying a gun.

 

[TNHarley]

Porn was never hard to get. Parents can install filters on their kids computers and phones.

It was when I was a kid.
Easily get around those filters.

 

[pknopp]

It was when I was a kid.
Easily get around those filters.

With camera's on their phones, kids can and do produce their own. How far of a nanny state do you want to take this?

 

[JoeB131]

This is another jaw-dropping example of how far into the gutter the woke liberal mind has gone. Texas, along with many other states, requires porn sites to verify that viewers are over 18 before allowing them to access the women-degrading, soul-destroying content. You'd think that nobody but the porn industry would object to this commonsense law, this basic protection of children from viewing porn.

But, the Biden Department of Justice, along with the ACLU, has filed a "friend of the court" brief in support of the porn industry's lawsuit against the Texas law! Predictably, the porn peddlers argue that the law "overly burdens" the ability of adults to access legal porn--yeah, never mind that the "legal porn" portrays women as nothing but sex objects who can be urinated on, anally penetrated, double penetrated, slapped, tied up, etc., etc. So much for the dignity of women, hey? And never mind that the law makes it much harder for minors to access porn sites.

By the way, the Texas age verification law passed the Texas legislature with an overwhelming majority. A similar law was approved unanimously by the Kentucky legislature.

The problem is these laws violate the First Amendment.

Here's the thing. I grew up in the 1970's. We didn't have the internet, but we did have Playboy and Penthouse and Hustler.

And we had no problem getting ahold of them as kids, usually after the adults threw them away.

Kids today are much more clever. Here's how you get around the Texas law. You sign up for a VPN service, put your identity in another country, and for 4.99 a month, you can watch all the penetration you want.

 

[pknopp]

I can actually see the objection to requiring proof of age for this. It's like a registration process, sort of like guns. The government wants your ID and for you to be on a registration list. I'm pretty sure the right would be against a registration list for everyone who owns guns, and, you have to be a certain age to buy a gun, meaning that the government could require you to be in a registration data base whenever you buy guns or ammo. While it's a good idea to not let minors buy guns, like minors viewing porn, I don't think we want the government having a registration list of everyone viewing porn or buying a gun.

while several justices flagged concerns about their ruling spilling over and affecting other First Amendment rights.

Takeaways from the Supreme Court arguments on Texas’ age-verification law for porn sites

Even the justices seem to understand this but few of them have any principles any longer.

 

[TNHarley]

With camera's on their phones, kids can and do produce their own. How far of a nanny state do you want to take this?

Having people take a pic of themselves and set up a password for porn is nanny state? lol

 

[pknopp]

But at least three justices suggested that approach was insufficient, including Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who drew from personal experience when she told the lawyer that the software was far from being foolproof. Barrett has seven children.

“Kids can get online porn through gaming systems, tablets, phones, computers. Let me just say that content filtering for all those different devices, I can say from personal experience, is difficult to keep up with,” she said.

Just because something is difficult is not a reason to violate Constitutional protections. Seems Barrett must have caught one of her kids wacking off to their phone but didn't want to deal with the issue herself because it was "difficult".

 

[TNHarley]

Carding at a sex shop is nanny state!! - pk

 

[TNHarley]

I guess verifying age for tobacco or marijuana online is nanny state, too?

 

[TNHarley]

If a twelve year old cant order bourbon online without verifying their age, do we even have freedom?

 

[Dragonlady]

They argued back when the Supreme Court tossed this before that it's up to the parents to monitor kids, not the state's.

As noted, some clamor for a nanny state.

That's right. The "Are you over 18 question is a waste of time. Who is going to answer "No".
The things you fools get you panties into a twist about is laughable. Talk about "picking up the peanuts while being trampled by the elephants".

 

[pknopp]

That's right. The "Are you over 18 question is a waste of time. Who is going to answer "No".
The things you fools get you panties into a twist about is laughable. Talk about "picking up the peanuts while being trampled by the elephants".

Kids will get around any requirements. The best way to deal with this is for the parents to deal with it.