Porn Ban in 2025

[marystoner]

Hi everyone. Long time fan first time posting anything.

I am reaching out to everyone to help spread awareness for the current threat to our free speech posed by Project 2025 which seeks to ban porn, related porn sites and associated technology companies.

Project 2025 states three things:

1) The particular wording of Project 2025 applies child pornography, misogyny and transgender ideology to the adult industry as a whole in an unfair appeal to moral extremists to justify a porn ban.

2) If enacted, it sets a dangerous precedent to further censor media, art, education etc.

3) In order to ban pornography, key internet technologies will most likely need to be either limited or controlled by the government.

This porn ban is really hiding a more nefarious agenda. The porn ban is a gateway to further censorship and control of all media in line of what we see in China and Russia. Porn has been chosen because, in the world of free speech, it is the low hanging fruit in terms of support for a ban.

To enforce a porn ban, the internet within the country needs to be controlled and our citizens monitored. The US must also be isolated from outside sources of porn. Once the internet is controlled, then the media and information can be government controlled. This is what is happening in other dictator led countries.

Is Trump is connected to Project 2025? Yes.

He has spoken at their events in favor of Project 2025, many of his people are involved in developing Project 2025 and Russell Vought, co author of Project 2025, said Trump's denial is part of the plan.

Does Trump have the means to execute this policy? Yes.

He has already put in place people, politicians and judges to circumvent the checks and balances of America's government. Evidence of this can be seen in the Supreme Court's ruling that Presidents have "absolute" immunity for official acts that are part of a presidents' "core constitutional powers". How else can a man convicted of 34 felony counts run for President under the Republican party.

Vought has also been caught saying that his group, the Center for Renewing America, was secretly drafting hundreds of executive orders, regulations, and memos. All this would lay the groundwork to quickly put into action Trump’s policies upon becoming president. He described his work as creating “shadow” agencies.

A porn ban this time around is a very real possibility. We have lost a lot of governmental checks and balances that have protected porn in the past. Please pass this message and knowledge on to others and urge them to protect free speech and vote against Trump and his porn ban.

 

[SmokingFap]

They can have my porn when they pry it from my cold dead hands.

 

[Treeview]

Vote

 

[deckardB26354]

They can have my porn when they pry it for my cold dead slippery hands.

Fixed it for you.

 

[Chernosoth]

The free porn sites will eventually need paywalls as internet costs rise. That may take the heat out of this issue.

 

[Beachfun51]

The free porn sites will eventually need paywalls as internet costs rise. That may take the heat out of this issue.

How ? Illegal is illegal?

 

[PaxNurgle]

Trump at is at least smart enough to understand that Project 2025 is deeply unpopular with the vast majority of the country. Most of it's backers realize this as well. Which is why Trump is always trying to backtrack from it, in an effort to curry independent and moderate (reasonable)-conservative votes.

But of course- that doesn't mean he'll push it forward once he's elected, despite claiming to backtrack from it.

Which makes the possibility of it being enacted to be that much more frightening. It will mean that Democracy, freedom, and all the checks and balances that protect it, will be gone as well, and it will truely be tyranny of the minority. Just like in Iran today.

 

[Chernosoth]

How ? Illegal is illegal?

I haven't bothered to read the project's manifesto, but they could be pissed about kids being able to see porn with just a click. Porn can be a drug and kids are more vulnerable to addiction. Verifying age by paying for porn could end the objections. Since Aylo, formerly known as Manwin, became a monopoly by showing free porn by the competitors, cutting their revenue, and then buying most of the competition at closeout prices, the survivors may be eager to see more paywalls.

 

[Beachfun51]

I haven't bothered to read the project's manifesto, but they could be pissed about kids being able to see porn with just a click. Porn can be a drug and kids are more vulnerable to addiction. Verifying age by paying for porn could end the objections. Since Aylo, formerly known as Manwin, became a monopoly by showing free porn by the competitors, cutting their revenue, and then buying most of the competition at closeout prices, the survivors may be eager to see more paywalls.

Oh ok makes sense except for the way they are doing it now. Who would give their license to a porn site

 

[SmokingFap]

Fixed it for you.

Nailed it.

 

[marystoner]

How ? Illegal is illegal?

Project 2025 states on page 5:

“Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection. Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women. Their product is as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime. Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered.”

 

[PaxNurgle]

So under that law, any self-help books that deal with gender dysphoria and homosexuality would be considered "pornography" no matter how professionally they deal with it. Same with any books with gay characters.

The whole thing is horrifying.

And lets not forget that the law could be applied to any one of us who post stories on this board. Ironically, many of the biggest project 2025 supporters on here (e.g. Icanhelp/Hisarpy, Rightguide/Sugardaddy1) have multiple screen names on this site; hence they might ironically face worse charges than the rest of us!

 

[SimonDoom]

Until somebody shows me evidence that Trump explicitly has endorsed this, I'm not going to be concerned. It's obviously unconstitutional under the First Amendment. There are at least five votes on the Supreme Court that would strike down any broad porn ban. I don't see this going anywhere.

 

[SmokingFap]

Until somebody shows me evidence that Trump explicitly has endorsed this, I'm not going to be concerned. It's obviously unconstitutional under the First Amendment. There are at least five votes on the Supreme Court that would strike down any broad porn ban. I don't see this going anywhere.

I don't trust THIS Supreme Court any farther than I could kick them.

 

[SevMax2]

I don't trust THIS Supreme Court any farther than I could kick them.

That is actually a valid point.

 

[adrina]

Until somebody shows me evidence that Trump explicitly has endorsed this, I'm not going to be concerned. It's obviously unconstitutional under the First Amendment. There are at least five votes on the Supreme Court that would strike down any broad porn ban. I don't see this going anywhere.

A better question to ask is what heritage foundation policies did Trump support and enact during his time in office.

Considering what they did to the supreme Court with Trump's very willing assistance, I'm not feeling like giving him another chance to mess things up worse with those extremely crazy people.

The past behavior is indeed predictive of the future.

 

[SimonDoom]

A better question to ask is what heritage foundation policies did Trump support and enact during his time in office.

Considering what they did to the supreme Court with Trump's very willing assistance, I'm not feeling like giving him another chance to mess things up worse with those extremely crazy people.

The past behavior is indeed predictive of the future.

Trump is not an idealogue. He doesn't give a shit about porn, or abortion, or any of it. The sole question he's going to ask is: what does this do for me? Opposing Roe v. Wade tapped into a huge segment of the American population that is rabidly anti-abortion, and they adore him now. He loves the applause. There's no similar movement against porn. I don't see Trump going in this direction, and I don't see the courts going that way either. I think this is a nothingburger. Remember that Scalia, the most conservative member of the Court at the time, was the author of the opinion that held flag-burning is protected by the First Amendment. At least several of the current Supreme Court justices are likely to have similarly robust First Amendment positions. There's no actual evidence that a broad anti-porn initiative is going to go anywhere. I don't think there's a substantial enough constituency for it.

 

[adrina]

Trump is not an idealogue. He doesn't give a shit about porn, or abortion, or any of it. The sole question he's going to ask is: what does this do for me? Opposing Roe v. Wade tapped into a huge segment of the American population that is rabidly anti-abortion, and they adore him now. He loves the applause. There's no similar movement against porn. I don't see Trump going in this direction, and I don't see the courts going that way either. I think this is a nothingburger. Remember that Scalia, the most conservative member of the Court at the time, was the author of the opinion that held flag-burning is protected by the First Amendment. At least several of the current Supreme Court justices are likely to have similarly robust First Amendment positions. There's no actual evidence that a broad anti-porn initiative is going to go anywhere. I don't think there's a substantial enough constituency for it.

I think you are being naive. I think you are playing best case scenario. You'll have to pardon my directness but I heard a lot of this type of equivocation prior to Trump being elected in 2016. About all sorts of topics including Roe.

Question for you, if Trump wins, and then for whatever reason dies, and then we have the completely off the wall manipulatable Vance.... What in American life are you willing to say no biggie to lose? Remember this is the man that has gone back and forth and will essentially do what he has been told to by his handlers. In this case his handlers would be the Heritage Foundation.

 

[forgotmyantidepressants]

There's no actual evidence that a broad anti-porn initiative is going to go anywhere.

I used to say the same thing about Roe v. Wade, and look what happened?

 

[SimonDoom]

I used to say the same thing about Roe v. Wade, and look what happened?

I never said the same thing about Roe v. Wade, for reasons I've expressed elsewhere. I always thought it was a very vulnerable opinion, and I was right. The trajectory for First Amendment protection of sexual expression, on the other hand, has been in the opposite direction, and to my knowledge there's no broad-based constituency for going in the other direction.

It doesn't logically follow to say "Look what they did to Roe, now they're going to gut the First Amendment" unless there's actual evidence that the courts are inclined in that direction or that there's a substantial movement to pack courts with judges who think this way. There is, as far as I know, no such movement. The Federalist Society is full of libertarian-leaning folks who are not anti-porn. There's just no there there.

I don't pretend to have a crystal ball. I never predicted Trump would be president. Anything can happen. But it's a big leap from "anything can happen" to worrying that one particular bad thing will happen. I think porn is relatively safe in our legal system, at least substantial portions of it that involve consenting adults.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Hi everyone. Long time fan first time posting anything.

I am reaching out to everyone to help spread awareness for the current threat to our free speech posed by Project 2025 which seeks to ban porn, related porn sites and associated technology companies.

Project 2025 states three things:

1) The particular wording of Project 2025 applies child pornography, misogyny and transgender ideology to the adult industry as a whole in an unfair appeal to moral extremists to justify a porn ban.

2) If enacted, it sets a dangerous precedent to further censor media, art, education etc.

3) In order to ban pornography, key internet technologies will most likely need to be either limited or controlled by the government.

This porn ban is really hiding a more nefarious agenda. The porn ban is a gateway to further censorship and control of all media in line of what we see in China and Russia. Porn has been chosen because, in the world of free speech, it is the low hanging fruit in terms of support for a ban.

To enforce a porn ban, the internet within the country needs to be controlled and our citizens monitored. The US must also be isolated from outside sources of porn. Once the internet is controlled, then the media and information can be government controlled. This is what is happening in other dictator led countries.

Is Trump is connected to Project 2025? Yes.

He has spoken at their events in favor of Project 2025, many of his people are involved in developing Project 2025 and Russell Vought, co author of Project 2025, said Trump's denial is part of the plan.

Does Trump have the means to execute this policy? Yes.

He has already put in place people, politicians and judges to circumvent the checks and balances of America's government. Evidence of this can be seen in the Supreme Court's ruling that Presidents have "absolute" immunity for official acts that are part of a presidents' "core constitutional powers". How else can a man convicted of 34 felony counts run for President under the Republican party.

Vought has also been caught saying that his group, the Center for Renewing America, was secretly drafting hundreds of executive orders, regulations, and memos. All this would lay the groundwork to quickly put into action Trump’s policies upon becoming president. He described his work as creating “shadow” agencies.

A porn ban this time around is a very real possibility. We have lost a lot of governmental checks and balances that have protected porn in the past. Please pass this message and knowledge on to others and urge them to protect free speech and vote against Trump and his porn ban.

Nonsense. Trump has disavowed P25 many times.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Trump is not an idealogue. He doesn't give a shit about porn, or abortion, or any of it. The sole question he's going to ask is: what does this do for me? Opposing Roe v. Wade tapped into a huge segment of the American population that is rabidly anti-abortion, and they adore him now. He loves the applause. There's no similar movement against porn. I don't see Trump going in this direction, and I don't see the courts going that way either. I think this is a nothingburger. Remember that Scalia, the most conservative member of the Court at the time, was the author of the opinion that held flag-burning is protected by the First Amendment. At least several of the current Supreme Court justices are likely to have similarly robust First Amendment positions. There's no actual evidence that a broad anti-porn initiative is going to go anywhere. I don't think there's a substantial enough constituency for it.

The left believes everything Rachel Maddow tells them.

 

[forgotmyantidepressants]

I never said the same thing about Roe v. Wade, for reasons I've expressed elsewhere. I always thought it was a very vulnerable opinion, and I was right. The trajectory for First Amendment protection of sexual expression, on the other hand, has been in the opposite direction, and to my knowledge there's no broad-based constituency for going in the other direction.

It doesn't logically follow to say "Look what they did to Roe, now they're going to gut the First Amendment" unless there's actual evidence that the courts are inclined in that direction or that there's a substantial movement to pack courts with judges who think this way. There is, as far as I know, no such movement. The Federalist Society is full of libertarian-leaning folks who are not anti-porn. There's just no there there.

I don't pretend to have a crystal ball. I never predicted Trump would be president. Anything can happen. But it's a big leap from "anything can happen" to worrying that one particular bad thing will happen. I think porn is relatively safe in our legal system, at least substantial portions of it that involve consenting adults.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you have to type in your driver's license number to access porn in Louisiana.

Conservatives claim they're trying to keep children away from porn (I agree that young kids shouldn't have access to pornography), but I think they are ultimately trying to shame people away from porn.

Do have any worry something like that could happen in other states or on a national scale? I really do think there is a possibility that the American south and certain states in the mid-west are going to become Christian theocratic hellscapes.

 

[SimonDoom]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you have to type in your driver's license number to access porn in Louisiana.

Conservatives claim they're trying to keep children away from porn (I agree that young kids shouldn't have access to pornography), but I think they are ultimately trying to shame people away from porn.

Do have any worry something like that could happen in other states or on a national scale? I really do think there is a possibility that the American south and certain states in the mid-west are going to become Christian theocratic hellscapes.

I think you are right about this. Different states will take different approaches, and the tactic of requiring online proof or registration may be an effective and popular way in some jurisdictions to get around First Amendment limitations. I just think it's extremely unlikely that we are going to see a big national push for a broad-based porn ban. I don't see the political support for it, and I don't see the courts accepting it.

 

[adrina]

No response. Interesting.

The reality is that you are still playing best case scenario thinking that Trump can be trusted to do or be anything reliable or stable. When he's mentally at his best he is for sale and transactional. When he's off his rocker - which is more frequently every day - he flip flops like a dying fish on a boat deck.

How do you trust any positional stability to a transactional man in cognitive decline?