←back to thread

US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

(www.wired.com)
94 points mikece | 1 comments | 27 Jun 25 15:55 UTC | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
silverquiet ◴[27 Jun 25 16:19 UTC] No.44398028[source]▶
I'm a Texan and can't say I'm particularly a fan of the state politics or the current US Supreme Court, but at the same time, I can't say that this law particularly bothers me. I don't have children, and so I don't know if I can really understand what parents are dealing with in trying to ensure that their children are kept away from undesirable material, but it does seem rather difficult; I certainly don't envy them.
replies(6): >>44398073 #>>44398125 #>>44398147 #>>44398325 #>>44399340 #>>44401581 #
linotype ◴[27 Jun 25 16:24 UTC] No.44398073[source]▶
This is just the beginning.

Edit: really confused as to why this simple statement is flagged

replies(4): >>44398133 #>>44398144 #>>44398289 #>>44398553 #
superfrank ◴[27 Jun 25 16:30 UTC] No.44398133[source]▶
"...and if we let gay people get married soon people will be marrying their dogs!"

I do think there are legitimate reasons to not like the bill, but what you said is classic slippery slope

replies(3): >>44398151 #>>44398165 #>>44398256 #
1. reverendsteveii ◴[27 Jun 25 16:45 UTC] No.44398256[source]▶
One difference is that there are absolutely no people involved with the current political power structure who are openly saying their end goal is to marry dogs.

"“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.”

--Project 2025