"article here":www.ksl.com/?sid=39405776&nid=148&title=gov-herbert-to-sign-resolution-calling-porn-a-health-hazard

happened to see something about this on the news this morning.

while i get porn addiction is bad, and that minors shouldn't be viewing it, i doubt it needs to be blocked entirely. i mean, what, are we going to start a war against and repress natural urges (sex related ones in this case) now? cause i can't see that ending very well for anyone.

it also wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if religion happened to be playing some role in this too. >.>

so, i guess anyone from Utah who checks out e621 might have a harder time doing so now, maybe.

treos said:
"article here":www.ksl.com/?sid=39405776&nid=148&title=gov-herbert-to-sign-resolution-calling-porn-a-health-hazard

happened to see something about this on the news this morning.

while i get porn addiction is bad, and that minors shouldn't be viewing it, i doubt it needs to be blocked entirely. i mean, what, are we going to start a war against and repress natural urges (sex related ones in this case) now? cause i can't see that ending very well for anyone.

it also wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if religion happened to be playing some role in this too. >.>

so, i guess anyone from Utah who checks out e621 might have a harder time doing so now, maybe.

This Todd Weiler guy is a bullshitter.

He's using the guise of "children watching porn" to try to bash the entire porn industry. Calling it evil, degrading, addicting.

Because if you disagree that means you obviously want children to watch porn right? BAH! What a motherfucker!

Classic case of "SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN" to complete his own agenda. He wants to get it into peoples mind that pornography is a health problem so that later we can get rid of it.

I loved this quote

"Pornography with its raw, debasing, violent and hate-filled scenes are the sex education for our children," she said.

well bitch if you actually talked to your kids in detail about sex and if our school systems would hold normal sexual ed classes(I remember 1 class from my school days) I'm sure they could figure out the difference between porn sex and real sex!

if anything, we need more porn

Or, you know, be a better parent if your kids are viewing porn before they "should."

And that is even giving their fake science too much credit about it being bad for people

Knotty_Curls said:
if anything, we need more porn

And everyone knows that there is only more being made as we speak...

The_Diggler said:
well bitch if you actually talked to your kids in detail about sex and if our school systems would hold normal sexual ed classes(I remember 1 class from my school days) I'm sure they could figure out the difference between porn sex and real sex!

i don't even remember when i had a sex ed class in school. though i've probably learned far more about the topic in my time on the internet (and this site) than in some sex ed class. and i know for a fact that i know FAR more about physical anatomy of both real and fictional creatures thanks to the furry fandom and sites like e6, FA, and IB, than i ever learned in school.

in fact, kitsune youkaii's babysitter comic provides a good explanation regarding condoms. of course theres always less NSFW alternatives to teaching/learning that too.

CamKitty said:
Or, you know, be a better parent if your kids are viewing porn before they "should."

And that is even giving their fake science too much credit about it being bad for people

agreed, much like my opinion regarding kids playing video games rated M for Mature before being old enough. in both cases it really does come down to the parents largely. if your kids are that young then why are you pretty much letting them do that instead of stopping them till they're older?

That's Americas goverment - Selling semi-automatic weapons in supermarkets is ok, but porn is a healthcare issue *facepalm*

D4rk said:
That's Americas goverment - Selling semi-automatic weapons in supermarkets is ok, but porn is a healthcare issue *facepalm*

As a German you really shouldn't lean yourself out of the window like that. All of our German censorship in any form of media is done because of our "think of the children" laws. It doesn't matter if it's banned media which is no longer allowed to be advertised or talked about in general, or if it's just that specific things aren't allowed to be sold or aired during the daytime.

NotMeNotYou said:
As a German you really shouldn't lean yourself out of the window like that.

https://www.dict.cc/?s=aus+dem+Fenster+lehnen

D4rk said:
That's Americas goverment - Selling semi-automatic weapons in supermarkets is ok, but porn is a healthcare issue *facepalm*

Utah ≠ the entire United States.

(Also, business owners are totally allowed to kick people out of a store for open-carrying. And they often do.)

NotMeNotYou said:
As a German you really shouldn't lean yourself out of the window like that. All of our German censorship in any form of media is done because of our "think of the children" laws. It doesn't matter if it's banned media which is no longer allowed to be advertised or talked about in general, or if it's just that specific things aren't allowed to be sold or aired during the daytime.

I think you didn't get my point precisely. What I mean is that its totally OK for them to sell [b]lethal[/b] weapons in supermarkets, Teleshopping etc and even having child versions of guns. But on the other hand they call porn a healthcare issue. My point is: Their definition of "Healthcare issues" is kinda macabre. (And yes, our censorship is to protect children from seeing violence and pornographics, but we don't disguise it as "Healthcare") PS: The cutting of movies and games sucks :(

Looks like the start of the article is a bit misleading:

Gov. Gary Herbert signed a resolution the state Legislature unanimously passed earlier this year calling for education, prevention, research and policy changes to address the pornography "epidemic."

Herbert also signed a bill requiring computer technicians to report to authorities finding child pornography in the course of their work.

Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, said his resolution doesn't ban anything or infringe on freedom of speech.

All this does is call for public wifi spots to filter against porno sites.

The_Diggler said:
well bitch if you actually talked to your kids in detail about sex and if our school systems would hold normal sexual ed classes(I remember 1 class from my school days) I'm sure they could figure out the difference between porn sex and real sex!

I dunno about you but my sex ed classes were real about things and actually covered stuff.

D4rk said:
What I mean is that its totally OK for them to sell [b]lethal[/b] weapons in supermarkets, Teleshopping etc and even having child versions of guns.[/quote] Actually, it's not as bad as you seem to think. Guns do not come loaded, and you cannot buy assault weapons--things designed solely for killing and not self defense (A few even consider semi-automatics to be assault). A good number of states require a license just to even purchase a gun, and almost all states require a permit to actually conceal it. Using lethal force without reason [i]will[/i] get your gun confiscated and yourself imprisoned, so I don't see what the problem is--The right to bear arms is intended to provide a means to defend oneself against the criminals that would carry lethal weapons anyways. [quote]But on the other hand they call porn a healthcare issue. My point is: Their definition of "Healthcare issues" is kinda macabre. (And yes, our censorship is to protect children from seeing violence and pornographics, but we don't disguise it as "Healthcare") [/quote] I didn't actually see that in the article. Sure, they'll apply a censor in the form of filters to public wifi spots, but it's not like they're outright banning it. Parents still have to apply parental controls to the roaming data phones and in-home wifi.

Furrin_Gok said:
Looks like the start of the article is a bit misleading:

All this does is call for public wifi spots to filter against porno sites.
I dunno about you but my sex ed classes were real about things and actually covered stuff.

Exactly. People act like bad sex ed is some universal experience in America. In my county, we did sex ed lessons three times. It just never stopped.

Actually, it's not as bad as you seem to think. Guns do not come loaded, and you cannot buy assault weapons--

Honestly, "assault weapons" is just a meaningless term that means whatever gun control proponents want it to mean, which is usually ''guns that look scarier than others.''

Fenrick said:
Exactly. People act like bad sex ed is some universal experience in America. In my county, we did sex ed lessons three times. It just never stopped.

Honestly, "assault weapons" is just a meaningless term that means whatever gun control proponents want it to mean, which is usually ''guns that look scarier than others.''

Huh, just looked deeper into it, apparently only seven states have an Assault weapons ban. It mostly applies to weapons which can shoot at least semi-automatic if not full-automatic, and have large magazines (Mowing down a crowd of people does not sound like self defense)

treos said:
it also wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if religion happened to be playing some role in this too. >.>

Because as we all know, "religion" is a single homogenous ideology with absolutely no divergence...
It's Utah. I don't want to get into it, but there's a particular denomination of a particular religion that influences the population there, but I highly doubt that it's even anywhere near universally supported by members of that denomination.
Just narrowing it down.

Furrin_Gok said:
Huh, just looked deeper into it, apparently only seven states have an Assault weapons ban. It mostly applies to weapons which can shoot at least semi-automatic if not full-automatic, and have large magazines (Mowing down a crowd of people does not sound like self defense)

One of which is where yours truly is from. Now, I can see the reasoning behind a magazine cap, but flash suppressors, shotguns with revolving cylinders, and folding stocks are also banned here just because they're spooky.

But hey, at least I can rest easy knowing that if someone decides to shoot me dead, his rifle won't have an unsightly flash suppressor...

Nowdays porn actually can be a serious problem for some, this video was actually pretty good on touching this subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oFVOJf0TzY

But when you start talk about prevention in a way that your internet connection is somehow blocked, then that's really bad approach to it. Comparing free wifi to cigarettes is already laughable. But if they are talking about publicly available internet accesses like libraries and such if I read article correctly then it's not much, you shouldn't watch porn in those places anyway! And if you are you actually may have some problems.

NotMeNotYou said:
As a German you really shouldn't lean yourself out of the window like that. All of our German censorship in any form of media is done because of our "think of the children" laws. It doesn't matter if it's banned media which is no longer allowed to be advertised or talked about in general, or if it's just that specific things aren't allowed to be sold or aired during the daytime.

German and Australia, I can sometimes feel so empathy for both countries when looking some games related shenanigans. It's always frustrating when you can't enjoy piece of entertainment because "what about the children" approach, when you clearly haven't been a child for ages.

Fenrick said:
Exactly. People act like bad sex ed is some universal experience in America. In my county, we did sex ed lessons three times. It just never stopped.

I also do have image in my head that sex ed in united states is pretty lackluster from the media I have consumed and not being there ever. And I choose to believe so because majority of males are still circumcised there, call me ignorant or something, especially when talking about united states as whole ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

We also had sex ed basically three times, first time at fifth grade, then in seventh grade withing health education and biology, but they all had bit differend angles. First time was basically "explore yourself and know what condom is" talk, second one was about STDs, porn, etc. and third one was more about how body works and how we reproduce.
I do also remember there being really small talk in confirmation school about porn, if talking about real life pornography it may have some ethical issues, including human trafficking and such which you can accidentally support by watching porn.

This is awful.

If the place I live ever passes a law that takes away the one thing in life that makes me feel a sense of belonging in the world, I hope karma makes those responsible feel the same pain they will be putting me through.

I have no family or friends IRL, and this is the only site I am a part of. I don't have any other social media accounts because I don't much care to.

This community is my home. You guy's are my family and my friends. So I curse the people who dare take such a loving, kind home away from me.

I stood for my family being taken away from me once. I will not stand for it again.

I'm sorry about being so angry and harsh, but this pisses me off. I probably won't hurt anyone or anything like that, but.... Idk. This makes me really angry, and as some of you already know, I'm not very quick to anger.

Like I say, all actions have consequences, and so if that ever happens, I do hope that whoever is responsible has a bad time.

As far as porn in General goes, porn is a form entertainment. Nothing more. Just like Hollywood movies depict extreme violence for the sake of entertainment, so too does porn depict sexual activities for the sake of entertainment. If Utah wants to be fair about what they are doing, they should just ban tv and movies and music too. After all, "we wouldn't want our children watching such awful things, now would we?"

I'm not saying that they actually should ban such things, but I'm saying that I think it's ridiculous to ban a form of entertainment, just because you don't like what it depicts.

On this site, I believe we call that blacklisting. Maybe someone should teach this Todd Weiler how it works, huh.

Fenrick said:
Because as we all know, "religion" is a single homogenous ideology with absolutely no divergence...
It's Utah. I don't want to get into it, but there's a particular denomination of a particular religion that influences a large percentage of the population there. Just narrowing it down.

sorry for generalizing but there is a lot ofbad mixed with the good when it comes to religion in general. saying "bad religious people" or "bad religion" doesn't really seem like a good way of differentiating the good from the bad when talking about it in no specific way.

hmmm...ah, it wasn't Utah but rather Idaho but one such example of a bad religion would be that group the followers of christ (don't worry, not going into too much detail). i saw a video on the secular talk channel on youtube not long ago where a girl had suffered treatable sickness and injuries whose parents were of that particular religion and rather than get her actual medical assistance they were let her suffer and just sit around praying for her to be magically healed. video if anyone is interested, it might be better to keep inflammatory comments to the video rather than here should they come up. ;)

so, any suggestions on how to differentiate the good from bad when not talking about any one specific form of religion? as i said above, saying good or bad religion might not work very well.

One of which is where yours truly is from. Now, I can see the reasoning behind a magazine cap, but flash suppressors, shotguns with revolving cylinders, and folding stocks are also banned here just because they're spooky.

But hey, at least I can rest easy knowing that if someone decides to shoot me dead, his rifle won't have an unsightly flash suppressor...

i'm not sure i've seen a shotgun with revolving cylinders. that sounds like it'd be interesting to see.

don't know why this last line was cut off in your post.

Furrin_Gok said:

Ok, I see what you mean

Ok, I see what you mean

This is all likely fake, like the satire article about 72 people being massacred by the national guard for protesting gun confiscation. That was a total hoax (thank God)

Forget personal responsibility, have the government dictate for personal choice /s Also, I hope people don't start generalizing Utah for the people or the dominant denomination that's there, it's not a perfect state, no one in the US is. That being said, yes, a lot of people have problems with it, I know people who personally got it and ended up in jail for a while, but for the sake of simplicity, it is what it is. This declaration doesn't take away responsibility, it's just disheartening when the government steps in to declare something like this.

fox_whisper85 said:
Forget personal responsibility, have the government dictate for personal choice /s Also, I hope people don't start generalizing Utah for the people or the dominant denomination that's there, it's not a perfect state, no one in the US is. That being said, yes, a lot of people have problems with it, I know people who personally got it and ended up in jail for a while, but for the sake of simplicity, it is what it is. This declaration doesn't take away responsibility, it's just disheartening when the government steps in to declare something like this.

Motherfuckers just wanna throw down. It's like when Michigan tried to ban AR's. I'm pretty sure we stopped those shits from even getting the bill passed

e621 porn crisis rehabilitation center

D4rk said:
Ok, I see what you mean

Don't falsify quotes, man. I can't tell what you're referring to, because I never posted that in this thread.

Fenrick said:
Now, I can see the reasoning behind a magazine cap, but flash suppressors, shotguns with revolving cylinders, and folding stocks are also banned here just because they're spooky.

Why the hell would you want a shotgun with a revolving cylinder? Do you expect a gang to send wave after wave of goons through your door? A shotgun in general, I could understand somebody wanting, but a revolving cylinder just sounds murderous.

If you don't want your child watching porn, don't give them access to the internet. A simple problem with a simple solution smashed with a hammer until the higher-ups like it.

It's like turning off a light by throwing a brick at it, it just ruins it for everyone and it makes you look crazy.

Chame34 said:
If you don't want your child watching porn, don't give them access to the internet. A simple problem with a simple solution smashed with a hammer until the higher-ups like it.

It's like turning off a light by throwing a brick at it, it just ruins it for everyone and it makes you look crazy.

Same.

Furrin_Gok said:
Why the hell would you want a shotgun with a revolving cylinder? Do you expect a gang to send wave after wave of goons through your door? A shotgun in general, I could understand somebody wanting, but a revolving cylinder just sounds murderous.

Because they look fun and I don't see the problem. They take way longer to load than detachable mag guns, which are still legal. And they haven't been used in anywhere near as many crimes as the Mossberg or Remington, which are also legal. The law is aimed at the Stryker shotgun which has a high ammo cap but also bans shotguns that only carry four or five shots. It's just too broad of a ban to help anyone.

treos said:

so, any suggestions on how to differentiate the good from bad when not talking about any one specific form of religion? as i said above, saying good or bad religion might not work very well.

The specifics of what they're trying to pass are important. Want to abolish conscription? Understandable. Want to make it a crime to speak out against you (see: the church that shall not be named)? Nope... You've also got to consider how organized the movement is. There's just no litmus test that works for every case.

Now we just need pornography to declare Utah a mental health crisis. It would be slightly more true than the converse.

Also, relevant (drug alarmism is hardly that different from sex alarmism)

I've heard a lot of opinions on this but I don't see anyone taking any ACTION!!

I got a plan!

I say we all take Utah and PUSH IT SOMEWHERE ELSE!!!

Pornagraphy is the worst thing that has ever happened to me. It has sucked away countless hours of my time, and I have received nothing in return, save for a constant compulsion to view it and encouragement for a relationship I can never have. I have lost educational and social opportunities, and it has only damaged my already fragile self-esteem. I used to have a free mind that looked to the future, and now I have a mind that hungers for it's daily--no, hourly--smut.

They're declaring it a health emergency because it does ruin lives, and it rewires the brain in the same way that drugs do. They don't want to ban it from the Internet, but they want to raise public awareness and start conversations about what it actually does to people, conversations that don't currently exist. The people behind this are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (popularly known as Mormons), and they believe that everyone should maintain the ability to choose what they will for themselves, which is the whole point of life. They know banning porn is impractical. They aren't trying to shut down sites like this.

Fenrick said:
Because as we all know, "religion" is a single homogenous ideology with absolutely no divergence...
It's Utah. I don't want to get into it, but there's a particular denomination of a particular religion that influences the population there, but I highly doubt that it's even anywhere near universally supported by members of that denomination.
Just narrowing it down.

I can tell you that every one of that "particular denomination of a particular religion's" members supports this declaration.

Aeruginis said:
Pornagraphy is the worst thing that has ever happened to me. It has sucked away countless hours of my time, and I have received nothing in return, save for a constant compulsion to view it and encouragement for a relationship I can never have. I have lost educational and social opportunities, and it has only damaged my already fragile self-esteem. I used to have a free mind that looked to the future, and now I have a mind that hungers for it's daily--no, hourly--smut.

...it does ruin lives, and it rewires the brain in the same way that drugs do...

I don't mean this rude, but...

Then why are you even here?

Kristal_Candeo said:
I don't mean this rude, but...

Then why are you even here?

It's an addiction. You might as well ask a meth-head the same question. I hate it and love it as I hate and love myself. One of the main reasons I got into porn in the first place is that I hunger for an intimate, trusting relationship, and this felt like a small way to satisfy that yearning. I went from sweet, simple, innocent fan-fiction to this quite rapidly, and it's never enough. I will never say that porn isn't fun—in the moment, that is—but it's really bad in the long run.

Qmannn said:
Couldn't you make this same argument about any action that becomes addicting, especially if it's pleasurable? What makes porn viewing so special in this regard? Would you consider an addiction destructive if it actually benefited a person in the long run without seriously harming them?

Anything can become addicting if a person enjoys it enough and they're able to experience it frequently without restrictions. It's one thing to develop a physical dependency but, with something like this, I think the real problem is self control.

They just admitted an addiction. Identifying a problem isn't the equivalent of a solution.

Yes, anything that is addicting and takes away your agency (your ability to control your choices) is undesirable, whether it be drugs, porn, food, social media, or web browsing. Heck, anything can be an addiction, and we have seen action taken by society in regards to everything I mentioned above, except for porn. Porn is especially bad, and is known to be harder to break from and stay away from than any drug. It is an actual physical dependency, and goes much farther than self control once you become involved in it.

Could you give me an example of something that is destructive but beneficial in the end?

Aeruginis said:
It's an addiction. You might as well ask a meth-head the same question. I hate it and love it as I hate and love myself. One of the main reasons I got into porn in the first place is that I hunger for an intimate, trusting relationship, and this felt like a small way to satisfy that yearning. I went from sweet, simple, innocent fan-fiction to this quite rapidly, and it's never enough. I will never say that porn isn't fun—in the moment, that is—but it's really bad in the long run.

Sorry. I actually meant the whole "why are you here" thing as more of a joke than anything else. My bad, I apologize.

Aeruginis said:
Yes, anything that is addicting and takes away your agency (your ability to control your choices) is undesirable, whether it be drugs, porn, food, social media, or web browsing. Heck, anything can be an addiction, and we have seen action taken by society in regards to everything I mentioned above, except for porn. Porn is especially bad, and is known to be harder to break from and stay away from than any drug.

You are right: anything can become an addiction. Porn is no exception. No matter what it is, your mind can form an emotional dependence on it. And that's been proven.

So I wouldn't have such a problem with your argument because you'd be right. But then in your next statement you said:

It is an actual physical dependency, and goes much farther than self control once you become involved in it.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not just here to say how wrong you are and blah blah blah, but it should be noted that porn itself does not cause physical dependencies. What you do while viewing porn can however.

So if your addiction actually is a physical one and you believe it is linked to your constant viewing of porn, then that can be fixed rather easily if you can identify what exactly is causing it. Like I said, it's likely not porn, but instead what you are doing while viewing porn.

Now, I've actually helped some people get over their physical addictions before, (some had fag addictions, some had porn addictions, etc.) So, I'd like to help if I can. But for the sake of the thread, I'm not gunna put down every single step here, so if you really do want my advice on helping get over your addiction, the gist of it is to just do something totally different than you do already while viewing porn.

For example, if you cuddle up and relax while viewing porn, then from now on when you feel the urge to view porn again, go someplace cold and start exercising. It also helps more if what ever you do is uncomfortable. So if you are in the cold exercising, and you are temped to just stop, have someone throw ice at you or something. (Just be sure that whatever it is you do is still safe. You don't want to get an injury, as that's not the goal.)

While the example I'm using seems kind of extreme, you can just do pretty much anything that makes you feel uncomfortable or bad so that when porn comes to your mind, your brain starts to link it to bad feelings, rather than good ones, and thus different chemicals are released into your body, making you feel subconsciously appalled by porn rather than drawn to it. Hopefully in time, you will stop thinking of it all-together, or when you do think of it, there will be no allure to it at all.

I do hope this helps, and if you have further questions, you could PM me, or something, I guess. After all, it's good to be helping.

Utah's kinda weird state, isn't it?

Anyway, if declaring something a public health crisis means they can divert public health money, I can totally see where this is going.

Aeruginis said:
Porn is especially bad, and is known to be harder to break from and stay away from than any drug.

Do you consume porn through insufflation? Seriously this is so far from the truth that you must have an envious life if porning is the worst jones you've had to live with

Aeruginis said:
Could you give me an example of something that is destructive but beneficial in the end?

Switch it up for something which may be beneficial but ultimately destructive in the end, and I can tell you that dogmatic fulfillment gives you that same hit of oxytocin you get from any other prurient stimulation, in that light religion has several demonstrable similarities with many physiologically-ingrained addictions. The social context has a lot to do with these things. So if you're suffering a cognitive dissonance from conflicting factors, perhaps porn isn't the only issue at hand. Now I wouldn't jump to conclusions - but demonization of an entire class of entertainment isn't far from decrying of poisonous ideologies, which is a fallacy that quickly leads to nowhere.

Phylax said:
...this is so far from the truth that you must have an envious life if porning is the worst jones you've had to live with

Same.

Furrin_Gok said:
Don't falsify quotes, man. I can't tell what you're referring to, because I never posted that in this thread.

Oh, I thought it was clear that my respond was a respond to your respond to my respond

Ok, seriously I mean this:

Furrin_Gok said:

Actually, it's not as bad as you seem to think. Guns do not come loaded, and you cannot buy assault weapons--things designed solely for killing and not self defense (A few even consider semi-automatics to be assault). A good number of states require a license just to even purchase a gun, and almost all states require a permit to actually conceal it. Using lethal force without reason will get your gun confiscated and yourself imprisoned, so I don't see what the problem is--The right to bear arms is intended to provide a means to defend oneself against the criminals that would carry lethal weapons anyways.I didn't actually see that in the article. Sure, they'll apply a censor in the form of filters to public wifi spots, but it's not like they're outright banning it. Parents still have to apply parental controls to the roaming data phones and in-home wifi.

Breaking news, Utah is the pre-post-nuclear apocalyptic wasteland of the United states. ¹ More at 1896. ₂

¹ which is ironic considering it's illegal to detonate a nuclear weapon in Utah.

₂ The year, not the military-time. It's when Utah became a state.

Phylax said:
I can tell you that dogmatic fulfillment gives you that same hit of oxytocin you get from any other prurient stimulation, in that light religion has several demonstrable similarities with many physiologically-ingrained addictions.

So do things like love, exercise, and eating. Anything that grants people a sense of community, even the things you might agree with, are the same way. Just don't act like you're above it.

hslugs said:
Utah's kinda weird state, isn't it?

Anyway, if declaring something a public health crisis means they can divert public health money, I can totally see where this is going.

Yes, judging an entire state you've never been too, seems legit. I could easily call California a weird state because they're afraid of people owning ferrets and hedgehogs because their DNR calls them "invasive" species. Basing the entirety of a state as a whole off the decisions of their government is still a pretty low blow, just saying.

Don't worry if they didn't blocked e621 in India where they banned 9gag tv because it was too pornographic. They hopefully will not block e621 in Utha.

Hexdragon said:
Don't worry if they didn't blocked e621 in India where they banned 9gag tv because it was too pornographic. They hopefully will not block e621 in Utha.

They're not blocking anything, where does it say they're going to control the sites? It doesn't. And besides, there are always ways to bypass blocks.

I wanted to reply to ya'll, but I'm not feeling very well and I'm having a hard time stringing two thoughts together. I think I need to take a nap...

fox_whisper85 said:
Yes, judging an entire state you've never been too, seems legit.

I meant their history mostly, and the resulting society.
Granted that's probably even worse.

As for invasive species, that a really really bad example. Being overcaution is a wise decision, given how difficult it is to undo a mistake. And there's a painful recent example of what not to do, right across the country in the Everglades.

Aeruginis said:
I wanted to reply to ya'll, but I'm not feeling very well and I'm having a hard time stringing two thoughts together. I think I need to take a nap...

I hope you get better.

hslugs said:
I meant their history mostly, and the resulting society.
Granted that's probably even worse.

As for invasive species, that a really really bad example. Being overcaution is a wise decision, given how difficult it is to undo a mistake. And there's a painful recent example of what not to do, right across the country in the Everglades.

Whatevs, I see this as some bullshit reason for others to bash the state as a whole.

Fenrick said:
So do things like love, exercise, and eating. Anything that grants people a sense of community, even the things you might agree with, are the same way. Just don't act like you're above it.

Indeed the point being that trying to position oneself as some kind of 'moral guardian' when you're pushing something with just as much potential detriment, is misleading at best and profoundly hypocritical to say the least.

'Even though everyone makes different choices in life, some thoughtful and some rash
When a person meets with joy, he will temporarily be pleased'

[雖趣舍萬殊，靜躁不同
當其欣于所遇，暫得于己]

Trying to delimit another's life based on the assumption of some inherent validity of your own mutually-exclusive kicks is just a liiitle proselytic

Now what was that bit of Ecclesiastes that the Byrds were so fond of....

Phylax said:
Now what was that bit of Ecclesiastes that the Byrds were so fond of....

Off-topic, but thanks for the tip. I hadn't heard that song before. Very nice.

Fenrick said:
Because they look fun and I don't see the problem. They take way longer to load than detachable mag guns, which are still legal. And they haven't been used in anywhere near as many crimes as the Mossberg or Remington, which are also legal. The law is aimed at the Stryker shotgun which has a high ammo cap but also bans shotguns that only carry four or five shots. It's just too broad of a ban to help anyone.

Man fuck the law. It's my right to bear arms.

Hexdragon said:
Utha.

New fictional kingdom name

TruckNutz said:
Man fuck the law. It's my right to bear arms.

I stopped paying attention. Are we arguing about gun control now?

The_Diggler said:
I stopped paying attention. Are we arguing about gun control now?

No, we're talking about fisting Grizzly Bears

Utah Republican: The First Amendment protects me from ‘second-hand’ porn at McDonalds

this senator is a backwards retard. sorry for the offensive words but it's true.

treos said:
Utah Republican: The First Amendment protects me from ‘second-hand’ porn at McDonalds

this senator is a backwards retard. sorry for the offensive words but it's true.

Again, the title of the article is misleading, though this time only by exageration.

“That’s what I think is often lost in the First Amendment discussion,” Weiler said. “Because someone may have the First Amendment right, according to the U.S. Supreme Court, to view pornography, but what about my First Amendment right to not view it?”

It's called the Fourth Ammendment. Privacy of a person and their possessions against unreasonable searching. Which is what you're doing if you're glancing over their shoulder to see what they're looking at.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourth_amendment

Edit: I suppose that looking around in itself isn't a violation, but you can't expect to persecute them over it.

I still think many on here are using this as a means of bashing Utah, its citizens and the state as a whole, that's my take on it.

oh goody, look what i just found over at Sargon of Akkad's reddit. Australia and UK Play Simon Says: No Homo.

hello, liberal nominee, Maroun Draybi. so, i guess you want pornography banned as well?

wtf is wrong with these people? this world just keeps getting dumber by the day. progress? oh, we can't have that. we need things to go backwards and be regressive instead. lets keep making the world a WORSE place to live in at every possible opportunity. >.< all these idiots make me not want to be considered the same species as them with each passing day.

aliens, if your out there, could you glass this whole planet instead of invading or visiting? just purge the stupidity from existence.

treos said:
oh goody, look what i just found over at Sargon of Akkad's reddit. Australia and UK Play Simon Says: No Homo.

hello, liberal nominee, Maroun Draybi. so, i guess you want pornography banned as well?

wtf is wrong with these people? this world just keeps getting dumber by the day. progress? oh, we can't have that. we need things to go backwards and be regressive instead. lets keep making the world a WORSE place to live in at every possible opportunity. >.< all these idiots make me not want to be considered the same species as them with each passing day.

aliens, if your out there, could you glass this whole planet instead of invading or visiting? just purge the stupidity from existence.

Monster_Kid said:
Sorry to jump in uninvited, but this was a fascinating read! I don't have much of an opinion, but this leads me to another question I think is worth discussing. What do you think is the acceptable age to discover porn? Or more specifically: What do you think is the acceptable age to discover furry porn? (Keep in mind that's I'm not referring to making an account on any of these sites, as I already know the answer to that.)

Speaking for myself, my childhood was quite boring in that regard. All I have is the usual stories of stealing dad's magazines in my middle/high school years. It wasn't until late high school I discovered online porn, or more specifically, furry porn. I had a really strange transition in that regard, Despite... "Getting what I needed" from seeing chicks in my high school years, That does almost nothing for me anymore. I always knew I liked men, imagining myself with them and getting glances in the locker room, but when I was young the only thing I had access to where these magazines, meaning I was largely unaffected by porn? (Until my later years at least until I gained my obsession with a certain character)

Sorry if none of you give a shit, I just thought it may be helpful.

No comment.

Kristal_Candeo said:
No comment.

Sorry! Did I say something dumb? I hid my post.

Monster_Kid said:
Sorry! Did I say something dumb? I hid my post.

No no, not at all. In fact, I was just thinking to myself how right Treos was but I didn't want to get too riled up about it. Long story short, this world and the people in it make me so angry sometimes. But that's all I'll say about it for now. I don't want to get started on that.

As far as what you said, my answer is I don't really know. I don't tend to see people the way others do. By that I mean I don't think age should be a factor to limiting a person if their mental maturity on the topic in question surpasses the average for their age group.

For example as far as porn goes, say if a certain twelve-year-old can distinguish between fantasy and reality, knows that porn is just an artistic form of entertainment, and has enough knowledge to know what the cultural limits of the forthrightness of their interest in it should be, and can demonstrate it in any normal life situation, then that twelve-year-old should be able to view porn if he/she wants to. But just because they can do it doesn't mean that all twelve-year-olds should have the same privilege because the one in question might be way more educated and mature than average twelve-year-old.

Also, if you make it illegal for all kids that age to view porn, then those who are more mature about it suffer the consequences too and that's not fair in my opinion. Just like if on a porn site a user is not causing any troubles and the site is not affecting them negatively IRL, and the user only logs on because the site helps them feel a sense of belonging because of their interactions with the other people who frequent the site, then when it is found out that the user is underage and they are banned simply because of their age and nothing more, how does that effect the user in question? They lost their only sense of belonging in the world and now feel subconsciously abandoned or outcast because of their age? That's not fair. Sure the hand of the site owner was somewhat forced due to the law and that's fine. But if that were the case, then at least send the person a personal message apologizing for your obligation to enforce the law...

IDK.

I know that this is a very much an extreme and unlikely example, but I digress.

It all comes back to the fact that I just feel that humans shouldn't have to hurt for the sake of those with more power, and the few should not be oppressed for the sake of the many.

No one should have to be hurt anymore and I wish I had the power to fix the entire world myself so that everyone could just be happy and at peace, but sadly I don't.

*sigh*

But that's another can of worms all together, and I don't have time to sit here and get angry and argue because the truth is that doing so won't fix the problem anyway and I'd just be wasting the time that I could spend ACTUALLY making a positive difference in the world.

I have no further comments.

(ps: @Monster_Kid Did you want me to hide your quote in my post too?)

Well, Utah is the home of the largest Christianity fan-fiction club.... err... Mormonism.

mrnotsosafeforwork said:
Well, Utah is the home of the largest Christianity fan-fiction club.... err... Mormonism.

See? Called it, an excuse to unfairly bash a state due to bullshit views. It's one thing to disagree with a religion, it's quite another to call it something without substantiation to ones argument. One could so easily bash another religion or viewpoint like atheism, but that would put me down to the same level of said bullshit.

If you're gonna bash an entire state for having different views, at least do your research before criticizing something you know nothing about.

Or better yet, why don't I criticize Colorado legalizing marijuana as being nothing but an excuse for people to make up fake illnesses just to find a reason to get high? The list goes on, generalizing and hating on a state just because the predominant religion is Mormonism is a pretty shitty thing to do.

fox_whisper85 said:
See? Called it, an excuse to unfairly bash a state due to bullshit views. It's one thing to disagree with a religion, it's quite another to call it something without substantiation to ones argument. One could so easily bash another religion or viewpoint like atheism, but that would put me down to the same level of said bullshit.

If you're gonna bash an entire state for having different views, at least do your research before criticizing something you know nothing about.

Or better yet, why don't I criticize Colorado legalizing marijuana as being nothing but an excuse for people to make up fake illnesses just to find a reason to get high? The list goes on, generalizing and hating on a state just because the predominant religion is Mormonism is a pretty shitty thing to do.

While I do feel you are right about how people shouldn't criticize something they don't understand just because of generalized assumptions, the sad truth is that more often than not humans will judge others regardless, whether that judgment is a positive one or a negative one. And unfortunately, most of the time it's a negative judgment because people of differing opinions don't always see eye-to-eye and usually rather argue that they are right (even if they are wrong) because most humans hate admitting that they are wrong even if admitting being wrong resolves the conflict outright.

Of course to be fair, not all humans are like that, but on the wider scale of things, my point still stands. Sorry ahead of time for this generalized statement since saying it kind of makes me a hypocrite in a way.

But though it may not be right or fair as you have clearly pointed out, if we just decide to rant about it, what would that really do other than start an unneeded flame war?

And I'm not accusing you of ranting, but I just don't to see what you said start a heated debate is all. So nothing against you, or anyone else, but I vote that we all just leave this topic where it is for the sake of peace.

So what do you say? Truce?

Kristal_Candeo said:
While I do feel you are right about how people shouldn't criticize something they don't understand just because of generalized assumptions, the sad truth is that more often than not humans will judge others regardless, whether that judgment is a positive one or a negative one. And unfortunately, most of the time it's a negative judgment because people of differing opinions don't always see eye-to-eye and usually rather argue that they are right (even if they are wrong) because most humans hate admitting that they are wrong even if admitting being wrong resolves the conflict outright.

Of course to be fair, not all humans are like that, but on the wider scale of things, my point still stands. Sorry ahead of time for this generalized statement since saying it kind of makes me a hypocrite in a way.

But though it may not be right or fair as you have clearly pointed out, if we just decide to rant about it, what would that really do other than start an unneeded flame war?

And I'm not accusing you of ranting, but I just don't to see what you said start a heated debate is all. So nothing against you, or anyone else, but I vote that we all just leave this topic where it is for the sake of peace.

So what do you say? Truce?

That's fine, I don't have any beef with you at all, I just wanted to get my point across that people criticize and judge unfairly and often with unsubstantiated facts. No hard feelings.

Ugh...everything surrounded by this topic feels absurd and meaningless. I've had enough of religion and politics. -___-

Aeon18King said:
Ugh...everything surrounded by this topic feels absurd and meaningless. I've had enough of religion and politics. -___-

Why the hell was this topic even made again? To give us all hypertension from the absurdity of politics? -_- Oy freaking vey.

Aeon18King said:
Ugh...everything surrounded by this topic feels absurd and meaningless. I've had enough of religion and politics. -___-

fox_whisper85 said:
Why the hell was this topic even made again? To give us all hypertension from the absurdity of politics? -_- Oy freaking vey.

Same.

Kristal_Candeo said:
Same.

fox_whisper85 said:
Why the hell was this topic even made again? To give us all hypertension from the absurdity of politics? -_- Oy freaking vey.

Why the hell are you people even still here? I saw this massive gathering of retardedness ending badly like a week ago....Jeez. What have you guys been going on about? (rhetorical question)

The_Diggler said:
Why the hell are you people even still here? I saw this massive gathering of retardedness ending badly like a week ago....Jeez. What have you guys been going on about? (rhetorical question)

The same could be asked of you.

fox_whisper85 said:
The same could be asked of you.

Me, I keep checking to see if somebody's got something constructive to say.

Monster_Kid said:
Sorry to jump in uninvited, but this was a fascinating read! I don't have much of an opinion, but this leads me to another question I think is worth discussing. What do you think is the acceptable age to discover porn?

16. It's when I discovered it (At least, as something I recognized as porn), and while I was confused (it was parody porn, guy propelled himself into the ceiling with ejactualation, which thinking back is kind of funny). When I was exposed to nudity (Actually in-person, not through porn) I was about eight, and my mind didn't even register it. I've since learned that the girl, who was also about eight, had drinking problems even at such a young age, which probably lead to her being exposed to sexual situations early. Still want to not believe (but end up believing anyways) that she was trying to seduce me.

Or more specifically: What do you think is the acceptable age to discover furry porn? (Keep in mind that's I'm not referring to making an account on any of these sites, as I already know the answer to that.)

Again, 16. Minors should still stay away, yes, but that's simply a matter of legal practice. There are countries where you're considered an adult at a much younger age, but that just feels wrong to me.

Speaking for myself, my childhood was quite boring in that regard. All I have is the usual stories of stealing dad's magazines in my middle/high school years. It wasn't until late high school I discovered online porn, or more specifically, furry porn.

I didn't see the magazines until after I discovered online porn. I actually felt disappointed in my dad for wasting money on things he could get for free. And I know he knew about getting them for free, I'd catch him sometimes watching porn or hentai on his computer, and he had bootleg copies of the (sfw) things he openly shared with me.

The_Diggler said:
Why the hell are you people even still here? I saw this massive gathering of retardedness ending badly like a week ago....Jeez. What have you guys been going on about? (rhetorical question)

I am here to try and bring peace, and resolve.

I guess I'm losing that battle though, huh? Especially since certain people rather call these interactions "retarded" and rile everyone up by doing so than help put an end to them from being desructive in the first place.

I don't blame you though. In your defense, bringing peace to any part of this world is a losing battle anyway. And letting the world destroy itself as it is already doing is a whole lot easier than trying to fix it. Especially when you try to do it alone. Trust me, I would know.

I mean, look at it like a Bon fire: a Bon fire is very destructive by it's very nature is it not? And if you want to put it out, there are two main ways to do so. 1) Let it's own destructive nature consume it's source of fuel until depletion, or 2) use what water you have to extinguish the flame before it gets to that point. Either way, the flame goes out in the end.

As for me, I'd like to use every ounce of water I have to put out the fire that is this world. But putting out a fire is nearly impossible when my only source of water is my own tears. I can only cry so much after all. And not to mention how much more difficult the task becomes when others rather add to the fire than help put it out.

But I digress.

So if you guys want to fight with each other instead of working towards peace, I'm not going to stop you. Even if I tried, it's not like I can. It seems I simply don't have the power to make any sort of positive difference here, so there's no use for me to even try to, is there?

If I can't save a measly forum thread, how can I expect save any thing else, much less the entire world.