4 ms·
Most governments already control alcohol and tobacco sales "to protect the children". It seems like the UK government thinks they can make the argument that por
by caval 13y ago
Most governments already control alcohol and tobacco sales "to protect the children". It seems like the UK government thinks they can make the argument that pornography falls in the same category. TV, movies, and YouTube already restrict pornographic content as well, and there doesn't seem to be a lot of strong arguments against that.
- bilbo0s 13y agoAlcohol and tobacco, at least in the US, are not controlled to "protect the children". Because a 20 year old man can't get alcohol either. To your other point, there is a material philosophical difference between Google/YouTube, (private company), banning books/media, and one's government banning books/media.
- jlgreco 13y ago> Alcohol and tobacco, at least in the US, are not controlled to "protect the children". Because a 20 year old man can't get alcohol either. Furthermore, in many (if not most) places, it is even worse than that. A 40 year old man cannot buy alcohol depending on the day of the week or time of day. In some states they can only purchase certain kinds of alcohol from the state itself (if they don't feel like paying for it at a bar). In others, wide swaths of alcohol are simply unavailable. Are we really to believe that the unavailability of beer over 4abv in Utah is to protect the children? No. That law, like nearly every alcohol law, is a puritanical attempt to regulate the morality of adults. These laws have no place in a civilized society, and neither do the "corresponding" porn laws.