I think the state has a role to play in child care. Not all parents are great and involved in their kids lives, plus kids hide what they do, and parents generally are behind on tech. While pornography is legal and I don’t object to it, it can really upset kids and make them aware of things they don’t need to know. Kids need to play - they don’t need to watch fisting. Age firewalls are appropriate but asking adult consumers to pay is cynical profiteering- especially if the porn actors do not receive a penny. Censorship of pornography is usually the first sign of wider censorship, but I think the distinction between children and adults is key - if adults are still permitted access to pornography, it is not censorship.

I thought it said "Pray for porn", never mind...

Pay for porn??

No way.

[xnxx.com]

Just the gooberment taking more money.

I think the idea that pornography (and not the pedophiliac kind) corrupts children is not supported by any evidence. Most kids simply wouldn't understand what it was all about and might either be bored or driven to laughter. Similar accusations have been made about movies, comic books, television and video games. It's based on the assumption we are all empty vessels that can be "corrupted" by whatever is poured into them. WIth the possible exception or religion, that is an invalid concept. It assumes all human beings lack free will, intelligence, and a built-in moral compass. But, as Sam McCoy notes in an episode of Law & Order, the generation that grew up on violent cartoons like "Tom & Jerry" and on shoot-em up movies became the generation that opposed the Viet Nam War. Let me add an anecdote: a friend told me that the children of an acquaintance of his were confronted by a flasher. One of the girls simple said, "My daddy's bigger" and the flasher was rapidly deflated. Kids are stronger than we imagine and none of those things--porn, TV, movies, comic books--are anywhere near as damaging as physical and psychology abuse and beatings. Cruel words & harsh treatment--which includes sexual abuse-- even if`called "tough love" or "reasonable discipline" by preachers, etc. are far more destructive and damaging to a child.

Pre-Internet, lawmakers could decide who saw what. That's precisely what film ratings are about. Too young for the rating, and you're not allowed to enter the cinema or rent/buy the videotape. While television isn't as easy to regulate, regular television channels tend not to show porn, and the ones that do typically require a subscription.

The modern Internet, with its ability to stream high quality video, has blown this out of the water. Now, it's very easy for children to access pornography, some of which might not even be legal for adults to watch.

So if they're anything like our government, they start trying to regulate the Internet. In the UK, there was a lot of talk last year about introducing systems where people had to register and prove that they were adults before accessing adult content. Sounds like another data protection nightmare to me, and also a real boon for scammers who are already pulling the "We just need your credit card number to validate that you're over 18. Your card won't be debited" con.

Some of the potential knock-on effects are quite scary. This has the possibility to censor youngsters' access to LGBT resources for example. Equally, to prevent closet, paranoid adults from going looking for the support that they need.

Me? If this happens, I'll use VPN for as long as I still can. This seems to work for most countries that have draconian Internet laws, though in some (Saudi Arabia?) you can go to prison simply for using VPN. But how many people are savvy enough to use VPN. How many adult forums (FetLife, for example) will just see most of their UK user base wiped out?

So, they have extended the definition of "Red Light Cameras"? Very disturbing line of reasoning especially coming from Democrat. Revenue seems to be the only motive for legislation now.

I will never NEVER agree with you, not in a billion years; children should NEVER be fed porn. That is the fantacy of some sick pervert. BUT we all got here due to a heterlsexual sex; it is normal/natural, obviously. It takes warped, twisted religion to make it "unnatatural". Sick!

It is just another example of government trying to control the lives of everyone

If all the liberatarians in america had sat down and tried to think of the dumbest law possible to mock they could not have thought of this one.

I’m ok with it! Until people learn to vote I’m ok with everything! They can do whatever they want! Only when freedom disappears will anyone feel a civic duty to vote!

Mixed feelings on this subject. A Democrat proposing the bill surprised me. Rhode Island is such a small state. Have the worst roads in the Northeast-constantly under construction in its capital of Providence.Could use the money to improve roads-lol.

This proposed law gives credence to the concept of the "nanny-state", and legislating morality.
It also opens the door wide for many unintended, but truly predictable, consequences.
It is nothing but a really bad idea, from start to finish.

At the End... you will Pay for Everything... that is the Dogma of Capitalism. Nothing shall be free.

You have stated it very well and I could not agree more.