Another edition of “No Love, Me”
Just because you have an issue with the existence of pornography doesn’t mean you get to use your lawmaking powers to ruin it for your state.
If you’re so concerned about people viewing porno in McDonalds and libraries, we already have laws for that. It’s called public indecency. You can enforce them and everything.
Also, there is no First Amendment? And it gives you the right to not view porno? You don’t need to cite the Bill of Rights here. It’s called “just not seeing” a thing. You don’t like porn? Don’t look at it.
Now what you’re doing is using the power of the law to cater to your desire to not see porn. For the children, according to an anecdote you heard…somewhere.
What kind of SWERFy shit is this, Gov?
It also says pornography “Equates violence toward women and children with sex and pain with pleasure, which increases the demand for sex trafficking, prostitution, child sexual abuse images, and child pornography.”
Again, more SWERFy bullshit, combining perfectly legal porn with perfectly illegal child porn to raise this “think about the children” alarm, and fuck you for that shit. Your fear of sex outside of marriage doesn’t give you the right to twist shit like this to suit your aims.
There is a difference. They are not the same, and trying to make them the same does far more harm than good.
Also, again, y’all are Republicans. I thought Republicans were against government dictating what a citizen wants to do or view. Or is there an exception that allows you to force your morals on others?
What am I saying? Of course you think there is a exception for you.
Me, Your Friendly Neighborhood Smut Peddler
P.S. Tony Perkins can go fuck himself with his lying ass. “Pornography is creating a public health crisis”? Not cancer? Not polluted water that affects kids? Not PTSD in combat vets? Not the shit health system that fucks over the poor, including poor kids?
Porno. That’s your concern. Bullshit.