this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
469 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19135 readers
2115 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Project 2025, a manifesto supported by the conservative Heritage Foundation, calls for a ban on pornography, labeling its purveyors as criminals and advocating for strict penalties, including jail time for producers and registered sex offender status for educators distributing it.

The manifesto argues that porn lacks First Amendment protection, framing it as harmful and exploitative.

With a right-leaning Supreme Court, proponents aim to overturn existing protections established in Miller v. California, potentially impacting mainstream media.

Donald Trump has pledged to bring Project 2025 contributors onto his team.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 33 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Least important effect of a Trump presidency - but I'm sure if he did this it'd be the straw that broke the camel's back for Gen Z Trumpers.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The one thing this election has all but confirmed for me is that over half of the country supports these things unabashedly, and I highly doubt porn will be the hero that magically changes these people. It's already banned in multiple conservative states, and all of them just voted red again.

Honestly, I believe that if the Trump admin brought back prohibition, his bootlickers would be the first in line telling us how it's the best idea ever.

[–] TexasDrunk@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

brought back prohibition

Don't even joke about that.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

He wouldn't do it. There's too much money being made there to already wealthy people that support him. I could see him threatening and blackmailing to get a piece of the pie though.

[–] billiam0202@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Then maybe they should have known that Project 2025 called for that before they decided to vote for Trump.

Violence against women is about to skyrocket when the incels can't get a date because they're too repulsive and can't watch porn to take out their sexual frustrations because of what they voted for.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 23 points 2 weeks ago

Then maybe they should have known that Project 2025 called for that before they decided to vote for Trump.

Those kids would be very angry if they could read

[–] socsa@piefed.social 5 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Nah, genZ are apparently prudes. They have less sex and apparently don't like fan service in media. Puritanism and teetotaling is the new counterculture.

[–] Laser@feddit.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

I dislike fanservice because it often seems shoehorned in, adding no value outside itself whatsoever and as such taking away from the rest.

Mind you if I want smut,I just watch smut. Simple as

[–] Good_morning@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 2 weeks ago

I've suspected the less sex has more to do with hookup culture being undesirable and lack of face-to-face communication. Not to mention "who can afford kids in this economy?"

[–] 3dogsinatrenchcoat@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Not least important when you think about how they define "porn"

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Nope, still pretty unimportant.

I'm pretty sex positive and pro-porn myself but compared to deporting legal immigrants with the wrong skin color or forcing motherhood on unconsenting women it's pretty unimportant.

Also like... destroying our entire government bureaucracy.

[–] 3dogsinatrenchcoat@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 weeks ago

their definition of porn = all queer people. Do you realize this? They want to arrest queer people for existing