Slashdot Mirror
Supreme Court Rules Against Anti-Porn Law
Saeed al-Sahaf writes "From Fox News/AP, the Supreme Court has ruled that the COPA (Child Online Protection Act), passed in 1998 ostensibly to shield kids from Web porn, is probably an unconstitutional muzzle on free speech. This is not quite like 'striking the law down' because the court simply said a lower court was correct to block the law from taking effect, since it likely violates the First Amendment, and sent the law back to a lower court for trial. The American Civil Liberties Union and other critics of the antipornography law said that it would restrict far too much material that adults may legally see and buy, the court said."
Note to moderators: before you think I'm trolling, read the entire article. I am serious, and I am just relating my own experience here.
That's called "porn creep" and it's a myth.
My experience is that porn can be used to sensitize a person to an experience. For example, for the first 33 years of my life, I couldn't come from a blowjob. It felt good, but I just couldn't get into it. So, I started looking at blowjob porn. Facial shots, bukkake, Cum on Her Face (cumonherface.com), spunk eating, snowballing, gagging, you name it, I whacked off to it. For months and months and months.
And you know what? I really dig it now. When my wife wants to give me a blowjob, she can really turn me on with it. We also do regular sex too, in case you're wondering. Enjoy that too.
So, I just have to wonder how good your "anecdotal evidence" really is. Has the subject really been studied? One thing we've got to understand is that there's a lot of myths about porn going around, and some of them have been pushed by people who are just anti-porn for other reasons.
Anyway, I guess you can chalk my experience up as another anecdote that would indicate that the truth, as always, is somewhere in between extreme viewpoints.
No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan