Would banning internet pornography and adult websites be feasible?

Initially, the internet was intended to have different domain extensions - .com, .net, .org, .gov etc.
Using a domain extension could have solved "the porn problem" from day one.
By simply requiring porn sites to use an extension such as .xxx
This would have made it enormously easy for parents and anyone who does not want to see porn to block it.
But having as few extensions as possible made it easier on registrars. So they made it simpler and used .com for almost everything.
 
You are a retarded commie ******. I do not wish to engage you at all anymore here.
Anything else you see from me will be mocking or hostile.

Just as God intended.
 
I do not at all agree that porn should be outlawed.

But I do believe something should be done to make it easier for parents to filter it out.

The current pushes to force age verification are ridiculous time wasters because anyone can easily bypass them.

Requiring any site with pornography to use a unique extension would be one way to filter it, as the poster above said.

But that would require expensive alterations to the very nature of the internet. Easier and cheaper to slap on some ineffective age verification requirement that stops nobody
 
Last edited:
How else did Mary get pregnant?
troll.webp
 
Initially, the internet was intended to have different domain extensions - .com, .net, .org, .gov etc.
Using a domain extension could have solved "the porn problem" from day one.
By simply requiring porn sites to use an extension such as .xxx
This would have made it enormously easy for parents and anyone who does not want to see porn to block it.
But having as few extensions as possible made it easier on registrars. So they made it simpler and used .com for almost everything.
GoDaddy bought up over 50% of the .coms, so there's that.
Yeah, that really should not have been allowed. I used to have my own domain.
GoDaddy bought up half the sites, and you may have to go through them if you want any of them.
Their way. Which is ass.
 
GoDaddy bought up over 50% of the .coms, so there's that.
Yeah, that really should not have been allowed. I used to have my own domain.
GoDaddy bought up half the sites, and you may have to go through them if you want any of them.
Their way. Which is ass.
Agreed - that is the kind of shit the government is supposed to regulate. Stop that shit.
 
The Bible does not specify Mary's exact age when she gave birth to Jesus, but many scholars believe she was likely between 12 and 16 years old based on cultural practices of the time.
Jesus had a twin brother and six siblings that were older than him.
 
I'm curious if it would. Given that porn consumption and production is a hotbed of ethical issues, I'm sure there will be some arguments in favor of it.

Some countries such as Iceland have passed bans on internet pornography, though critics say that these bans create black markets.


While I'm aware that porn has always been around, and that black markets will exist for potentially anything which is banned, I personally have little interest in pornography, and it wouldn't hurt me if some incel didn't have access to Pornhub and OnlyFans 24/7.
No.

Because as revolting as it can be to some, it is a form of free expression under the constitution.
 
No.

Because as revolting as it can be to some, it is a form of free expression under the constitution.
Hmm... you would be challenged on that.
It could be argued that posting on the internet is public domain. NOT private.
So public indecency etc. could be argued. I am not making that argument, but it could be one.
 
God had sex with an unwed teen...That is normal...
Guess you never read the Bible.

There's 3 specific parts of the Trinity. The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit.

The Virgin Mary was made pregnant thru a divine act of The Holy Spirit.
Evidence of this can be proven thru DNA samples of the Christ's blood.


If you think it's possible for a man to become pregnant....then it's highly possible that the Virgin Mary became pregnant thru the Holy Spirit without the act of sex.


In humans, the normal number of chromosomes in each somatic cell is 46, arranged in 23 pairs
. Of these, 22 pairs are autosomes, and one pair consists of sex chromosomes (XX for females and XY for males).

Theologically, Christians believe Jesus was both fully human and fully divine. Assuming Jesus was a biologically normal human male, he would have had 46 chromosomes in each of his somatic cells, including an XY pair as his sex chromosomes. The question of the paternal contribution to his DNA within the context of the Virgin Birth is a theological consideration, not a scientific one.

While there are reports regarding alleged blood samples of Jesus suggesting a different chromosome count (like 24 chromosomes), these reports are not scientifically substantiated.

LINKS
 
15th post
Evidence of this can be proven thru DNA samples of the Christ's blood.
What exactly is the DNA evidence that a birth was “immaculate”, without a transmission of semen?

What would that kind of DNA evidence even look like?
 
When considering how ubiquitous porn is on the internet and the existence of VPNs, it's pretty much pointless to try and ban all porn.

Right now, the UK is trying to make it so that all access to porn (and certain other things) requires the use of age verification through IDs and such, and it's turning out to be a joke.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom