As a blanket statement against everyone, yes. But it's observed reality.

Your observations. Not reality.

A bad thing is bad if its done to an adult or a child

If an adult consents to engage in harmful or immoral activity, they have the right to do so, and they are giving any other parties involved permission to profit from it. Because adults have free will, and can choose to do that if they want to. Neither you nor anybody else has the right to prevent them from making such a decision: Your belief that such individuals are your moral inferior does not give you veto power over their decisions or behavior.

You're still arguing for a position which would require you to make all actions (good or bad) legal, because according to you, everyone should be able to make their own decisions.

As long as their actions are not harming others who did not consent to participate in those activities, then yes. It is not the role of government to arbitrate morality. It is the role of government to protect people's rights.

Wait, what? This statement doesn't make sense. It's globalists that are pushing porn and sexual degeneracy on the public. Globalists aren't trying to ban porn. They're actively trying to make it more widely available. They're exposing kids to it. They're trying to normalize it and all forms of sexual degeneracy. The only people advocating for the banning of porn are on the right, and very, very few people on the left arguing that it harms women, which by itself is true.

It does make sense. You are seeking to control people's behavior by banning an activity that you find morally objectionable. That you believe your motivations are better than those of the globalists who are seeking to control people's behavior is irrelevant. You want to take away the freedom of adults to consume porn because you don't like it, full stop.

Quite aside from the fact that making this argument in favor of government authoritarianism only further empowers the left to use these arguments to take away your rights when they regain power, this view is also fundamentally at odds with the very concept of individual rights and human autonomy upon which our entire civilization is based. It's not any more acceptable coming from a moralfagging paleoconservative than it is coming from a leftist.

It is the responsibility of parents to ensure that children are not accessing or being exploited by activities that are harmful to them, not the government. Just as it is the responsibility of parents to educate their children about sexuality, not government-run schools.

How easy it is for you to hate someone for taking away a tool of control being used against your fellow man.

Bans are a tool of control being used against my fellow man, you moron.

This is what I hate about most debates I'm in. People love to skim through what is said. They don't listen or consider, they only want to speak. That's not how debates work. That's not how conversation works. If you'd bother to read my long form dissection of porn, you'd realize that's not why we invented speech in the first place, the purpose of speech.

For the last fucking time, I am not making a free speech argument regarding porn, so all of your carefully-crafted ad nauseum talking points about the nature of free speech and why porn is not included are lost on me. I don't care. If you had bothered to read what I said, you would know that.

As a blanket statement against everyone, yes. But it's observed reality.

Your observations. Not reality.

A bad thing is bad if its done to an adult or a child

If an adult consents to engage in harmful or immoral activity, they have the right to do so, and they are giving any other parties involved permission to profit from it. Because adults have free will, and can choose to do that if they want to. Neither you nor anybody else has the right to prevent them from making such a decision: Your belief that such individuals are your moral inferior does not give you veto power over their decisions or behavior.

You're still arguing for a position which would require you to make all actions (good or bad) legal, because according to you, everyone should be able to make their own decisions.

As long as their actions are not harming others who did not consent to participate in those activities, then yes. It is not the role of government to arbitrate morality. It is the role of government to protect people's rights.

Wait, what? This statement doesn't make sense. It's globalists that are pushing porn and sexual degeneracy on the public. Globalists aren't trying to ban porn. They're actively trying to make it more widely available. They're exposing kids to it. They're trying to normalize it and all forms of sexual degeneracy. The only people advocating for the banning of porn are on the right, and very, very few people on the left arguing that it harms women, which by itself is true.

It does make sense. You are seeking to control people's behavior by banning an activity that you find morally objectionable. That you believe your motivations are better than those of the globalists who are seeking to control people's behavior is irrelevant. You want to take away the freedom of adults to consume porn because you don't like it, full stop.

Quite aside from the fact that making this argument in favor of government authoritarianism only further empowers the left to use these arguments to take away your rights when they regain power, this is also view that is fundamentally at odds with the very concept of individual rights and human autonomy upon which our entire civilization is based. It's not any more acceptable coming from a moralfagging paleoconservative than it is coming from a leftist.

It is the responsibility of parents to ensure that children are not accessing or being exploited by activities that are harmful to them, not the government. Just as it is the responsibility of parents to educate their children about sexuality, not government-run schools.

How easy it is for you to hate someone for taking away a tool of control being used against your fellow man.

Bans are a tool of control being used against my fellow man, you moron.

This is what I hate about most debates I'm in. People love to skim through what is said. They don't listen or consider, they only want to speak. That's not how debates work. That's not how conversation works. If you'd bother to read my long form dissection of porn, you'd realize that's not why we invented speech in the first place, the purpose of speech.

For the last fucking time, I am not making a free speech argument regarding porn, so all of your carefully-crafted ad nauseum talking points about the nature of free speech and why porn is not included are lost on me. I don't care. If you had bothered to read what I said, you would know that.

As a blanket statement against everyone, yes. But it's observed reality.

Your observations. Not reality.

A bad thing is bad if its done to an adult or a child

If an adult consents to engage in harmful or immoral activity, they have the right to do so, and they are giving any other parties involved permission to profit from it. Because adults have free will, and can choose to do that if they want to. Neither you nor anybody else has the right to prevent them from making such a decision: Your belief that such individuals are your moral inferior does not give you veto power over their decisions or behavior.

You're still arguing for a position which would require you to make all actions (good or bad) legal, because according to you, everyone should be able to make their own decisions.

As long as their actions are not harming others who did not consent to participate in those activities, then yes. It is not the role of government to arbitrate morality. It is the role of government to protect people's rights.

Wait, what? This statement doesn't make sense. It's globalists that are pushing porn and sexual degeneracy on the public. Globalists aren't trying to ban porn. They're actively trying to make it more widely available. They're exposing kids to it. They're trying to normalize it and all forms of sexual degeneracy. The only people advocating for the banning of porn are on the right, and very, very few people on the left arguing that it harms women, which by itself is true.

It does make sense. You are seeking to control people's behavior by banning an activity that you find morally objectionable. That you believe your motivations are better than those of the globalists who are seeking to control people's behavior is irrelevant. You want to take away the freedom of adults to consume porn because you don't like it, full stop.

Quite aside from the fact that making this argument in favor of government authoritarianism only further empowers the left to use these arguments to take away your rights when they regain power, this is also view that is fundamentally at odds with the very concept of individual rights and human autonomy upon which our entire civilization is based. It's not any more acceptable coming from a moralfagging paleoconservative than it is coming from a leftist.

It is the responsibility of parents to ensure that children are not accessing or being exploited by activities that are harmful to them, not the government. Just as it is the responsibility of parents to educate their children about sexuality, not government-run schools.

How easy it is for you to hate someone for taking away a tool of control being used against your fellow man.

Bans are a tool of control being used againsts my fellow man, you moron.

This is what I hate about most debates I'm in. People love to skim through what is said. They don't listen or consider, they only want to speak. That's not how debates work. That's not how conversation works. If you'd bother to read my long form dissection of porn, you'd realize that's not why we invented speech in the first place, the purpose of speech.

For the last fucking time, I am not making a free speech argument regarding porn, so all of your carefully-crafted ad nauseum talking points about the nature of free speech and why porn is not included are lost on me. I don't care. If you had bothered to read what I said, you would know that.

As a blanket statement against everyone, yes. But it's observed reality.

Your observations. Not reality.

A bad thing is bad if its done to an adult or a child

If an adult consents to engage in harmful or immoral activity, they have the right to do so, and they are giving any other parties involved permission to profit from it. Because adults have free will, and can choose to do that if they want to. Neither you nor anybody else has the right to prevent them from making such a decision: Your belief that such individuals are your moral inferior does not give you veto power over their decisions or behavior.

You're still arguing for a position which would require you to make all actions (good or bad) legal, because according to you, everyone should be able to make their own decisions.

As long as their actions are not harming others who did not consent to participate in those activities, then yes. It is not the role of government to arbitrate morality. It is the role of government to protect people's rights.

Wait, what? This statement doesn't make sense. It's globalists that are pushing porn and sexual degeneracy on the public. Globalists aren't trying to ban porn. They're actively trying to make it more widely available. They're exposing kids to it. They're trying to normalize it and all forms of sexual degeneracy. The only people advocating for the banning of porn are on the right, and very, very few people on the left arguing that it harms women, which by itself is true.

It does make sense. You are seeking to control people's behavior by banning an activity that you find morally objectionable. That you believe your motivations are better than those of the globalists who are seeking to control people's behavior is irrelevant. You want to take away the freedom of adults to consume porn because you don't like it, full stop.

Quite aside from the fact that making this argument in favor of government authoritarianism only further empowers the left to use these arguments to take away your rights when they regain power, this is also view that is fundamentally at odds with the very concept of individual rights and human autonomy upon which our entire civilization is based. It's not any more acceptable coming from a moralfagging paleoconservative than it is coming from a leftist.

It is the responsibility of parents to ensure that children are not accessing or being exploited by activities that are harmful to them, not the government. Just as it is the responsibility of parents to educate their children about sexuality, not government-run schools.

How easy it is for you to hate someone for taking away a tool of control being used against your fellow man.

Bans are a tool of control being used by my fellow man, you moron.

This is what I hate about most debates I'm in. People love to skim through what is said. They don't listen or consider, they only want to speak. That's not how debates work. That's not how conversation works. If you'd bother to read my long form dissection of porn, you'd realize that's not why we invented speech in the first place, the purpose of speech.

For the last fucking time, I am not making a free speech argument regarding porn, so all of your carefully-crafted ad nauseum talking points about the nature of free speech and why porn is not included are lost on me. I don't care. If you had bothered to read what I said, you would know that.