US State Proposes Law To Block Porn Unless You Pay A 20 Dollar Fee

originally posted by: NthOther
Everyone forgets about the abused and emotionally scarred people who staff the industry. Human trafficking is a huge problem associated with pornography.

But no one wants to talk about that.

"Go away. 'Batin."

Who forgets? Human trafficking is not exclusively associated with pornography and I am pretty sure it is pursued by law enforcement.

a reply to: seagull

To be fair, she didn't say all conservatives were for this. She said it was another example of ____ from the right. And the lawmaker who proposed this is indeed a conservative Republican from the right wing.

And it does fit with a lot of other conservative-backed "bedroom laws" like the previous bans on LGBT marriages, anti-sodomy laws, etc. Obviously all conservatives don't agree with those other "bedroom laws" (in fact, I'd guess that most conservatives don't agree with them). But it doesn't change the fact that it's almost always conservative Republican lawmakers who propose this type of stuff.

I think it was Clinton as POTUS who tried to ban porn off US based servers - it was ultimately deemed to be unconstitutional (freedom of speech) and that is exactly what I expect will happen again if this is attempted. Not that I access porn but getting a license to do so would not be something anyone would want associated with their name or would they? Perhaps some wouldn't care.

a reply to: cuckooold

I got a better law, tax adult people for having sex to begin with and make sex into a law that sex should only for married people only, Oops that's call prostitution.

I love when law makers wants to control sexual conduct.

In the name of the littler children, religious pious and the boogey man.

Since the beginning of man sexual conduct has become and obsession, a dirty thing and something that needs to be controlled.

a reply to: cuckooold

no - just no

if people cannot sort thier own admin out - make them pay the 20 bucks to get the " saftey " of a porn free computer

this will be a litmus test of how serious they are about " protecting thier children "

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: crazyewok
I thought the republicans where for SMALL goverment

Only when it doesn't interfere with their religious fairy tales.

That why there should be two partys.

One for the religious wack jobs and one for those who actually do want smaller goverment.

a reply to: cuckooold

To me this just screams its not about the moral turpitude associated with banning pornography which is hypocritical at best but really about revenue generation.

Next thing will be a "fake news" blocker. That one would be a federal law and probably get passed.

Bill of Rights? "The constitution is just a piece of paper."

a reply to: reldra

It would appear, given not just your response but a couple of others as well, that I over-stepped myself in my response to your post.

Looking back over both our posts, I owe you an apology. In my haste to castigate, I did what I accuse you of having done...my apologies.

So, suitably irritated at myself, I shall endevour to do better.

Again, my apologies.

This has to be anti-constitutional.

Government cannot impose a censorship then assert a fee to remove it.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Not to mention the watch list that you're surely to be placed on...

a reply to: seagull

Exactly.

Were I resident of that state, it would be in my best interests to "test" this imposition to the best of my abilities.

So... Pay To Press Play, huh? I wonder if we'd all be afforded the same thing when it comes to all the information and perspectives they're trying to ban via the Fake News CENSORSHIP push.

So you will have to pay 20 bucks to get a filter free device, or install an os with no filter, probably a free one... tough choices

Don't you people got a few tera cache in case of rainy days?

Who wants to bet me that the people sponsoring this bill probably watch just as much or more porn than the average person?

People are forgetting that we are talking about South Carolina, a state that is still stuck in the 60's. Travel to any place at least 50 miles inland off I-95 any direction and you will be thrown back in time.

originally posted by: 38181
People are forgetting that we are talking about South Carolina, a state that is still stuck in the 60's. Travel to any place at least 50 miles inland off I-95 any direction and you will be thrown back in time.

:looks around here where I live in SC:

Nope. Sorry. Not seeing it.



The bill is silly, and as said, no way to enforce it. I have 3 desktops here at my house, all hand built by me. When I upgrade, I replace parts, ordered online and sent to me.

Tablets that I have, I can't see me changing out any time soon. Even if I did, all I'd have to do is drive 30 miles across the border to GA and buy that device there.

Another red state wiping their ass with the constitution

WTF is wrong with paying an extra 20 for a computer system to fight human trafficking ? I build my own and dont surf porn , but I would pay that little extra . Its 20 measly dollars folks