- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Total porn ban proposed by Michigan law makers
Posted on 9/16/25 at 1:01 pm to boweswi05
Posted on 9/16/25 at 1:01 pm to boweswi05
quote:
Here in Alabama they are close to it.If you trying to access a pornographic site here you have to provide your ID verifying your age before you can access it.
We have that in Louisiana. Im not necessarily opposed to some sort of age verification but VPNs get around it anyway. And there is still tons and tons and tons of porn to access on the web that doesnt check age
0
Posted on 9/16/25 at 2:01 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
Again, pretty sure that the law does not apply to viewers. If that’s wrong, please show me. Seems like that detail takes care of your concerns.
To me whether production or consumption it’s the same debate.
It’s a fundamental question: why are we applying legal charges, some of the most strident we have available, to what amounts to a moral / sin situation?
Hell half the people who consume porn aren’t even in a relationship, who are we protecting by removing their access to it?
Them? They’re a consenting adult.
And beyond this particular question, where does it end?
Adultery is a much bigger sin. It was punishable by death in the Old Testament. Is that where we’re headed with this?
How about alcohol? Far more direct harm is a result of alcohol than porn. Are we going to tell people they can’t drink?
I just don’t understand the compulsion I see on the right to mandate legally things that are better dealt with via prayer because they’re ultimately between someone and God rather than someone and the state.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 2:08 pm to TulsaSooner78
The road to hell is paved by libertarians.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 2:16 pm to tide06
quote:I don’t think it’s the same debate. Whether one chooses to consume pornography, notwithstanding the fact that it does affect others, is a personal decision. Whereas supplying pornography on the internet within the access of children is not personal. That’s much different IMO.
To me whether production or consumption it’s the same debate. It’s a fundamental question: why are we applying legal charges, some of the most strident we have available, to what amounts to a moral / sin situation?
You’re right that government can’t and shouldn’t prohibit all vice, but vice that undermines society is within the government’s purview.
The government does prohibit alcohol and tobacco consumption—even for people who are not minors. The government also prohibits drunkenness.
Only God can free you from your sin, but the government is set by God to protect the public. In this case, against distribution of pornography.
I suppose you and I will just have to disagree on whether pornography is destructive.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 3:13 pm to RogerTheShrubber
One of the devils best tools is internet porn I guarantee. People don’t understand what it’s doing to these young kids seeing xxx hardcore gang you know what’s when they are 10 years old . And kids are getting addicted to hard core xxx at 11 or 12 years old to the point they are watching it on end every day of the week. Listen to some of these young early and mid 20’s guys who overcome it and are starting to speak out on it, and how much of a hold it had on them and how much is distorted their realities
Posted on 9/16/25 at 3:47 pm to tide06
quote:
I just don’t understand the compulsion I see on the right to mandate legally things that are better dealt with via prayer because they’re ultimately between someone and God rather than someone and the state.
Republicans advocating for morality laws is just as bad as Democrats advocating for laws against private gun ownership.
Both are protected by the Constitution.
Go after the people who are engaging in human trafficking in order to find unwilling participants in their movies. They are the criminals. Not the people who produce / distribute it with willing participants and consumers.
Any Republican who supports this law can no longer proclaim to support "small government" and should no longer lecture anyone about personal responsibility and accountability. They are tyrants.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 4:57 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
Whether one chooses to consume pornography, notwithstanding the fact that it does affect others, is a personal decision.
You’re still fundamentally inserting the government into the decision as to whether that material should be produced or consumed and then locking people up on major prison terms when your personal code of morality isnt followed.
Whether it’s consumption or supply it’s the same assumption on your part in that you are claiming the right to tell someone else what to do by inserting the government into what amounts to personal behavior that doesn’t impact outside parties.
I fail to understand on what moral authority you claim that right and how you then insert any sort of speed bump once you do to make sure we aren’t literally stoning people for cheating on their spouse once that precedent is set.
Either we are codifying the Christian Bible into American law or we aren’t.
I would argue that it’s best that we agree on moral codes based on the Bible but that we agree not to make government business out of things that don’t have to be because no one else is being harmed.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 6:34 pm to Ebridg3
quote:
Well... how old are you?
Are you not aware of what's going on in this country with younger generations, reproduction, dating, marriage?
Porn is a major effing issue, as is only fans... among other things. You can completely remove religion from the reasoning behind porn being bad, and see that porn is part of a larger issue that is creating a weaker society.
Old enough to realize that legislating and enforcing a prohibition like this is both unrealistic and likely counterproductive.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 7:12 pm to tide06
quote:I’m not doing it, the democratically elected representatives are. Cities and states govern themselves and can decide if these things should be prohibited. Obscenity has never been protected under the 1st amendment.
You’re still fundamentally inserting the government into the decision as to whether that material should be produced or consumed and then locking people up on major prison terms when your personal code of morality isnt followed.
quote:Distributing pornography on the internet is not merely personal behavior. It’s tantamount to obscenity in the public square.
Whether it’s consumption or supply it’s the same assumption on your part in that you are claiming the right to tell someone else what to do by inserting the government into what amounts to personal behavior that doesn’t impact outside parties.
quote:Morality is objective, not subjective, and the moral authority is God, whether you believe in him or not. Human law must conform to natural law if it is to be just. And again, this law is being promulgated (assuming it passes) by lawful authority.
I fail to understand on what moral authority you claim that right and how you then insert any sort of speed bump once you do to make sure we aren’t literally stoning people for cheating on their spouse once that precedent is set.
quote:This is a non-sequitur.
Either we are codifying the Christian Bible into American law or we aren’t.
quote:The only true moral code is based on God’s authority, so yes we agree on that. But no, I don’t believe pornography is without harm—and apparently neither do these legislators.
I would argue that it’s best that we agree on moral codes based on the Bible but that we agree not to make government business out of things that don’t have to be because no one else is being harmed.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 7:32 pm to idlewatcher
quote:
Do you even Dearborn bro?
I was wondering if the muslims would back this.
It would put the dems in a real pickle.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:02 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
I’m not doing it,
You’re arguing in favor of it so that’s a non starter.
quote:
Distributing pornography on the internet is not merely personal behavior. It’s tantamount to obscenity in the public square.
It’s by definition not in the public square.
It’s in someone’s home so public obscenity justifications dont apply.
quote:
Human law must conform to natural law if it is to be just.
Natural law doesn’t require the legal prohibition of this type of activity.
quote:
Either we are codifying the Christian Bible into American law or we aren’t.This is a non-sequitur.
It’s absolutely not.
It’s the entire foundational element of your entire premise.
Porn is bad because you don’t like it, you think it’s obscene are your subjective arguments. The only objective justification you can possibly cite is the Bible.
Absent the biblical justification your argument is just personal opinion barely cloaked by a sense of moral superiority to justify usurping everyone else’s personal rights and beliefs by using the government to remove their freedoms that you apparently object to.
And even the biblical justification is flawed. Banning porn doesn’t save someone from lust or adultery in a biblical sense, it just redirects it.
If the only reason someone isn’t using porn is the law prevents it that isn’t a moral person, it’s a lustful person who just lacks an outlet and will seek it elsewhere, the underlying sin is still there unresolved.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:10 pm to RolltidePA
quote:
Flash forward; there's a sudden and extreme demand for vintage Victoria's Secret catalogs in Michigan.
shite, vintage Sears catalog…
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:20 pm to prouddawg
quote:
Muzzles would be on the evangelicals side on this one, I ‘magine.
The taliban just shut down the Internet in a region of Afghanistan, to stop it's immorality.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:32 pm to The Pirate King
quote:
No way in hell this passes in Michigan
Michigan is the one spot it could pass.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:37 pm to StringedInstruments
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:38 pm to StringedInstruments
What about romance novels (women's porn)?
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:40 pm to StringedInstruments
Porn is destructive. Haven't watched it in about a year and a half.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:40 pm to StringedInstruments
There state is being taken over by Muslims, great job Michigan, go after what really matters
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:49 pm to tide06
I like how you only selectively pick parts of my post to respond to.
Do you not think cities and states should be able to govern themselves?
I didn’t say the internet was literally the public square, I said it was tantamount to the public square, I.e., a place where everyone is exposed to the ideas.
No, natural law does not require this prohibition, but it does not restrict a human law making this prohibition either.
No where in my premise is the idea that the Bible should be codified. I don’t even know what that means. How would John 3:16 be a law?
Porn isn’t bad because I think it’s bad, it’s bad because God says it’s bad.
Law restrains evil and promotes good. I’m sorry you don’t think pornography is evil, but it is.
Do you not think cities and states should be able to govern themselves?
I didn’t say the internet was literally the public square, I said it was tantamount to the public square, I.e., a place where everyone is exposed to the ideas.
No, natural law does not require this prohibition, but it does not restrict a human law making this prohibition either.
No where in my premise is the idea that the Bible should be codified. I don’t even know what that means. How would John 3:16 be a law?
Porn isn’t bad because I think it’s bad, it’s bad because God says it’s bad.
Law restrains evil and promotes good. I’m sorry you don’t think pornography is evil, but it is.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 10:05 pm to TulsaSooner78
quote:What is it you think laws do?
Republicans advocating for morality laws is just as bad as Democrats advocating for laws against private gun ownership.
quote:Obscenity is not protected under the Constitution.
Both are protected by the Constitution.
quote:100% should be doing this.
Go after the people who are engaging in human trafficking in order to find unwilling participants in their movies.
quote:We live in a federal system. The state and local governments were always understood, since the founding, to have the authority of “police powers”. Police powers, since the founding, has meant “the state’s general power to regulate for the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the people.”
Any Republican who supports this law can no longer proclaim to support "small government" and should no longer lecture anyone about personal responsibility and accountability. They are tyrants.
It wasn’t until the 14th amendment that the bill of rights even applied to the states.
This post was edited on 9/16/25 at 10:06 pm
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News