Age Verification Laws Are Just A Path Towards A Full Ban On Porn, Proponent Admits
from the outing-themselves-as-the-censors-they-want-to-be dept
It’s never about the children. Supporters of age verification laws, book bans, drag show bans, and abortion bans always claim they’re doing these things to protect children. But it’s always just about themselves. They want to impose their morality on other adults. That’s all there is to it.
Abortion bans are just a way to strip women of bodily autonomy. If it was really about cherishing children and new lives, these same legislators wouldn’t be routinely stripping school lunch programs of funding, introducing onerous means testing to government aid programs, and generally treating children as a presumptive drain on society.
The same goes for book bans. They claim they want to prevent children from accessing inappropriate material. But you can only prevent children from accessing it by removing it entirely from public libraries, which means even adults will no longer be able to read these books.
The laws targeting drag shows aren’t about children. They’re about punishing certain people for being the way they are — people whose mere existence seems to be considered wholly unacceptable by bigots with far too much power.
The slew of age verification laws introduced in recent years are being shot down by courts almost as swiftly as they’re enacted. And for good reason. Age verification laws are unconstitutional. And they’re certainly not being enacted to prevent children from accessing porn.
Of course, none of the people pushing this kind of legislation will ever openly admit their reasons for doing so. But they will admit it to people they think are like-minded. All it takes is a tiny bit of subterfuge to tease these admissions out of activist groups that want to control what content adults have access to — something that’s barely hidden by their “for the children” facade.
As Shawn Musgrave reports for The Intercept, a couple of people managed to coax this admission out of a former Trump official simply by pretending they were there to give his pet project a bunch of cash.
“I actually never talk about our porn agenda,” said Russell Vought, a former top Trump administration official, in late July. Vought was chatting with two men he thought were potential donors to his right-wing think tank, the Center for Renewing America.
For the last three years, Vought and the CRA have been pushing laws that require porn websites to verify their visitors are not minors, on the argument that children need to be protected from smut. Dozens of states have enacted or considered these “age verification laws,” many of them modeled on the CRA’s proposals.
[…]
But in a wide-ranging, covertly recorded conversation with two undercover operatives — a paid actor and a reporter for the British journalism nonprofit Centre for Climate Reporting — Vought let them in on a thinly veiled secret: These age verification laws are a pretext for restricting access to porn more broadly.
“Thinly veiled” is right. While it’s somewhat amusing Vought was taken in so easily and was immediately willing to say the quiet part loud when he thought cash was on the line, he’s made his antipathy towards porn exceedingly clear. As Musgrave notes in his article, Vought’s contribution to Project 2025 — a right-wing masturbatory fantasy masquerading as policy proposals should Trump take office again — almost immediately veers into the sort of territory normally only explored by dictators and autocrats who relied heavily on domestic surveillance, forced labor camps, and torture to rein in those who disagreed with their moral stances.
Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection. Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women. Their product is as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime. 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.
Perhaps the most surprising part of this paragraph (and, indeed, a lot of Vought’s contribution to Project 2025) is that it isn’t written in all caps with a “follow me on xTwitter” link attached. These are not the words of a hinged person. They are the opposite — the ravings of a man in desperate need of a competent re-hinging service.
And he’s wrong about everything in this paragraph, especially his assertion that pornography is not a First Amendment issue. It is. That’s why so many of these laws are getting rejected by federal courts. The rest is hyperbole that pretends it’s just bold, common sense assertions. I would like to hear more about the epidemic of porn overdoses that’s leaving children parentless and overloading our health system. And who can forget the recent killing sprees of the Sinoloa Porn Cartel, which has led to federal intervention from the Mexican government?
But the most horrifying part is Vought’s desire to imprison people for producing porn and converting librarians to registered sex offenders just because their libraries carry some content that personally offends his sensibilities.
These are the words and actions of people who strongly support fascism so long as they’re part of the ruling party. They don’t care about kids, America, democracy, or the Constitution. They want a nation of followers and the power to punish anyone who steps out of line. The Center for Renewing America is only one of several groups with the same ideology and the same censorial urges. These are dangerous people, but their ideas and policy proposals are now so common it’s almost impossible to classify it as “extremist.” There are a lot of Americans who would rather see the nation destroyed than have to, at minimum, tolerate people and ideas they don’t personally like. Their ugliness needs to be dragged out into the open as often as possible, if only to force them to confront the things they’ve actually said and done.
Filed Under: 1st amendment, age verification, censorship, for the children, free speech, porn ban, project 2025, russell vought
Companies: center for renewing america


Comments on “Age Verification Laws Are Just A Path Towards A Full Ban On Porn, Proponent Admits”
Gay Bashing 2.0
Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children,
It’s worth pointing out and remembering that the venn diagram of ‘people claiming that they are just trying to ‘protect children from porn” and ‘people asserting at every opportunity that any sexuality or gender identity other than pure CIS heterosexuality is inherently sexual and therefore pornographic’ is so close to being a perfect circle that you’d need scientific instruments to notice the non-overlapping parts, so when someone says their book bans and the like are motivated by ‘keeping porn away from kids’ what you should hear is ‘eliminating and vilifying any mention of sexuality or gender other than the ones we define as acceptable’.
Re:
To the surprise of no one, it turns out the far-right organizations’ interest in these law proposals was yet ANOTHER way to get at them darn queer people!!!!
(i’m getting so tired of these people I swear.)
Re: Re:
To reiterate: I’m all for the idea of kids not seeing porn. (Seriously, I think everyone can agree that’s not something they should be seeing), but surely it can be done in a better way than what lawmakers are serving up so far?
We should be able to strike a balance of both, without it leading to either zero guardrails or a full-on ban.
Re: Re: Re:
Already exists, it’s called parenting!
Re: Re: Re:2
What a wonderful world we would live in if the people in power took this idea more seriously.
Re: Re: Re: The solution already exists
As the AC above pointed out there’s already a way to do that and they’re called ‘parents’, however for the sort of people who want to blame everything on everyone but themselves telling them ‘Hey maybe you could pay attention to what your kid is looking at/reading, and answer questions when they come to you with something they aren’t sure of’ makes for a much harder sell than ‘It’s everything’s and everyone’s fault but yours!’
Re: Re: Re:2
You’re very much correct, sadly.
Nowadays I’ve resigned myself to simply looking away from it all and praying I won’t be arbitrarily barred from perfectly legal content just because some politician got their knickers in a twist over the existence of adult content on the internet.
Re: Re: Re:3
A little addendum: I also find myself greatly annoyed by the fact we have no courts here in the EU that seem able to challenge these when they appear here, either.
Re: Re: Re:
Not disagreeing with you re kids & porn.
But I saw porn as a kid. And I went to a hardcore Catholic church (and school) as a kid.
Take a wild guess which one fucked up my views on sex and sexuality more, and for longer.
Re: Re: Re:2
The porn? /s
Re:
Considering the history of such anti-expression movements…
I’m sure this will not end with the elimination of certain people groups, nosireebob.
/s
Re:
I’m willing to bet part of this is just a bunch of straight men trying to find some way to deny their own sexual attraction to trans women. This study, one that openly admits it’s working with largely anecdotal evidence, studied hundreds of social media posts on the topic and found that plenty of men admit attraction to trans women but then backstop their admissions with misogyny.
That seems about par for the course here: a bunch of legislators who view themselves as religious leaders are attempting to legislate their own shame into non-existence. Kill all porn and they’ll finally be able to deny their own desires because they’ll no longer have access to the stuff that turns them on the most.
Re: Re:
They’re predators who view women only as sex objects, and are horrified at the thought of a woman having a vestigial penis.
Re: Re:
Par for the course from the
Groping
Ogling
Pedophiles party.
Bathroom bans from people who don’t want the next victim they peep on to look male.
Those who attack trans kids on sports because they want to use “you’re good at sports” as an excuse to have little girls get raped “to check you’re not a boy”
The sick deviants who fantasize so hard about genitals being mutilated, they’ve convinced themselves it happens in the real world.
The book-banners trying to get rid of books that teach kids how to recognize and defend against abuse, because they want soft targets. (The keader of the Philadelphia arm of major ban-pushing group – the orwellianly-named “Moms for Liberty” – was a Pastor and registered sex offender who pled guilty to abusing a 14-year-old.)
Every right-wing accusation is a confession, /especially/ when they call others “groomers.”
Re: Re: Re:
It does happen, actually. It’s just that most people call it circumcision.
Conservatives better not read it, then, or they will get excessive hair growth on their hands.
Can anyone tell me roughly how much money I need to make the entire country bend to my narrow view of the world?
I’d like to outlaw assholes like this right-wing twat, but I’m not sure if I can make the payment. I would like them removed from libraries, because they sure af aren’t there to read.
Re:
To get enough money to do that, you pretty much have to lack the morals to do the right thing with it once you’ve got it.
This wasn’t hidden, or thinly veiled , not only was it in plain sight, it’s in their f-ing advertising for Project 2025, they want people to know this is their end goal.
https://www.project2025.org/truth/
MAGA is also, publicly, very much against pedophilia whilst privately enjoying themselves on Epstein island.
Could it be that MAGA is also privately a large consumer of pornography while publicly calling for it to be outlawed?
I remember reading about the Republican National Conversion site being a large draw for prostitution and that red states have a large consumption of pornography.
There should be some sort of psychological name for this type of aliment.
Re:
Conservatism, or white supremacy. /S
Re:
Utah is generally regarded as the #1 porn consuming state. Norman’s are nice comma but damn they are repressed.
Re: Re:
Speech-to-text fail
Re: Re: Re:
No, just two thumb typing before coffee.
to paraphrase..
First they came for the pornographers, and I did not speak up because I was not a pornographer.
Then they came for the librarians and educators, and I did not speak up because I was not the one putting this smut in our libraries.
Then they came for the telecommunications companies, and I did not speak up because I was not transmitting this smut.
Them they came for me, and, well, you know how the rest goes..
All porn ban or age verification scenes will do is make more subscribers and more money for services like IPTV great.
Out of about 178000 channels there are about 4500 porn channels
Because they have no server presence in the USA, they are not subject to US laws
That is why the copyright folks cannot shut it down
Before you say Kim Dotcom his mistake was having servers in the USA
If none of his servers had been in the USA he would not have been subject to prosecution in the United States
In short, IPTV great will never be subject to American laws as long as none of their servers are in the United States
Re:
Kim Dotcom is a major supporter of rightwing, fascist assholes. He’s not a champion of free speech, or of individual rights, or of any kind of justice: he’s just another bloated obscenely wealthy asshole who wants to reshape the world to benefit himself, and fuck everyone else. I hope he dies in the basement of the most violent wing of a US prison.
Re: Re:
My point is that IPTV great is not subject to USA laws and they added another 1200 porn channels for about 4500 porn channels out of about 178000 channels overall
Since none of their servers are in the USA the people running it are not subject to prosecution in the United States
Re: Re: Re:
Get outta here with the shilling
Re: Re: Re:2
My point is they are not subject to American laws.
Re: Re: Re:2
i didn’t see any brands.
Re: Re: Re:3
Not the point, dude.
Re: Re: Re:
Oh, it’s you again.
All it takes is a lot of political will to abuse the current criminal “justice” system.
China already does it with their “secret police” worldwide, the US with the CIA and extradition treaties, and I can list a few other examples where all a country needs is either a willing backer and the political will to extradite.
No one’s untouchable, everyone’s a target if they piss off the powers that be enough.
And the big players will look the other way if there’s either enough political will or bribes.
A VPN isn’t gonna save anyone. Hell, it’s not even that secure.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
If that VPN is on a home computer abroad it is beyond the reach of American law enforcement
If this censorship bs goes thrlough I intend to do that.
If I buy a home in Mexico or the Bahamas and put an encrypted relay there it will be beyond the reach of us law enforcement
And remember, they can’t prosecute what they can’t read
Re: Re: Re:3
shut up 4 chan user
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:4
The USA had zero jurisdiction over a home computer in another country even if the homeowner is American
Jack Ma made a mistake not using an encrypted relay outside of China.
They can’t prosecute what they can’t read
Re: Re: Re:5
You are dangerously advocating for self-censorship and thoughtcrime.
A VPN would not have saved Jack Ma’s ass from “tax evasion”, as his words were widely reported on in the mainstream media.
Your bullshit means everyone ought to police their fucking thoughts before they even USE a VPN.
And again, you clearly have ZERO grasp on things like geopolitics or how far a surveilance state will go, or even basic things like knowledge of criminal law.
VPNs don’t stop polonium pellets, nor can they stop people from monitoring you electronically OR physically.
VPNs cannot stop governments or other malicious actors from READING what is PUBLISHED.
And VPNs do NOT magically shield you from crimes. Or the reach of a government hell bent on sending you to a grave.
What is it with the right taking words/phrases and sucking any and all meaning, context, and nuance out of them?
…Oh wait, it’s so they can use them as cheap, vague labels to drape over the many, many things they love to hate.
Today it’s ‘porn,’ which now means “any representation of/reference to sex I find objectionable.”
See also ‘groomer,’ ‘woke,’ ‘socialist,’ ‘DEI,’ etc etc etc
Re:
Censorship will never affect the rich
Look at China. There are enough millionaires and billionaires who can afford to set up encrypted relays abroad.
That is what will happen in America. Rich people will evade censorship in that manner. An offshore home computer is not subject to american laws even if the homeowner is American
And if it is encrypted that cannot see what you are doing. They can’t prosecute what they can’t read
Re: Re:
Jack Ma still got dinged.
And I don’t particularly care for your psychopathic wheeling and dealing.
The rich are not untouchable in China.
Oh, and the only things keeping Taiwan from being hit with nukes are the silicon fabs and the 7th Pacific Group. If you really, really wanna go that way. And the latter is uncertain.
Re: Re: Re:
If you are connecting to a home computer abroad they can’t find out what you are up to if the connection is encrypted
This is why will any porn ban unenforceable on the rich
Jack Ma should have learned how to set up an encrypted relay abroadm he wouud have never been caught
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
What is scary is that trump is back.in.the lead according to one gambling site in Britain that takes bets on ejections worldwide
Their AI now has Trump at about 49 to 48 over
She stepped on it with her price control proposals as they could lead to rationing
Unlike in WWII rationing wouid be all on computers which can be hacked. And that is likely what will happen if rationing fears come true. People will try to hack the system to get more
If you use VPN and tor combined you become untraceable. You can’t prodevute what you can’t trace.
Either way, expect saled of secure disk wiping software to go up.
As long as you are not in Texas, wiping your disk is not a crimr
Re:
shut up 4 chan user
Re: Re:
If rationing does come there will be things like the black market rich people can afford
And a rich person can buy one $300k Mercedes that could outrun pse enforcement to evade arrest for any offense realated to that
That Mercedes can go 220 miles an hour and law enforcement would never catch it
As long as you are not in Texas you can jam police radios so backup cannot be called
In Texas jammets can be considered an “instrument of crime” if it is used in furtherance of a crime
Sometime back when they caught with someone they figured why the remote controls for their spike strips would not work
He was using a 315mhz jammer and was charged under that law
He broke no federal laws jamming the link to their spike strips but did break state law in Texas
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Can confirm this website is real. I just bet 300 BTC that Joe Biden could squirt further than Trump.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
Damn it I’m only now realizing I didn’t hit reply on that one Anonymous Coward’s comment. Now I look stupid. This has never happened before.
Re: Re:
I knew you loved Trump, but even I never thought you’d go so far as to emulate him. #alt-facts #post-truth
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
If any librarian were my wife and she got arrested for that I would do everything possible to obstruct prosecutors
I would break in to their office computer networks find the folder of the prosecutor assigned to the case and erase everything in that folde so he could not do his work
I wouud love to see the look on his face when he found everything on his folder on the network had been erased preventing him from prepating his case against her
I wouud do that for her and use tor and vpn so I could not be traced
Re:
This weird non sequitur fan fic is just really pathetic. And if any librarian were your wife, she’d divorce you just over your inability to spell basic words correctly. You know it’s not required to share every random scenario that plays out in your head, right?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
All she wouid have to do is post bail then go on the run.
I would break into law enforcement computer networks and erase the warrants for her arrest.
That wouid be the end of it once those warrants were erased from their coputers
Re:
Oh, you again.
But what if a librarian is a husband? What then?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
When it comes to libraries and bookstors every employee in the place could interfere with a cops attempt to arrest the boss
If I were working in one of these places I would gather every employee in the place and interfere with the arrest
If every employee in the place came at those cops they would be outnumbered and manhandled and going out there with their butts kicked,good and proper. Their attempt to arrest the boss would fail when they were badly outnumbered and got their assed kicked.
I would make beimg a karate black belt an employment if l were the boss. With 10 more karate black belts the cops would not succeed
They wouid be wondering what hit them
Unless you are in Texas jam their radios so backup can’t be called.
Texas is the only state in the 50 where jamming police radios is a crime under their “instrument of crime” statute
Oh hello! You’re obviously new to the U.S.!
You must have fallen for that bullshit about, “Land of opportunity and freedom” huh? A lot of people do.
In other news, construction of barns has increased by 700%. Many in the industry contribute this to the concurrent rise in birth rates…
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Conservatives will not prevent our access to children.
Re:
That’s nice Herman.
Re:
You, the foreign laws guy and the project 2025 guy be showing up in the comment section of techdirt like clockwork huh.
You got nothing better to do?
Re: Re:
I mean when da jebus says fiddling your winkle is a no-no, what else ya gonna do with yourself…
Re: Re: Re:
Get the TSA to do it for you by taking a flight somewhere.
Re:
Not sure how to parse this.
One way, it’s just really fucked-up.
Another way, it’s just an obvious truism.
Re: Re:
“Not sure how to parse this.”
Easy: he’s a far right asshole trying to smear all LGBT people as sex pests.
Under Project 2025 (and presumably outside it too), they plan to class transgender people pornographic for simply existing. That means that anyone who aids or abeits a trans person could be charged with making porn, whether it’s just selling them a dress or giving them an affirming haircut.
And if they have children, or the child is trans- yeah, it gets real bad real fast.
They don’t want to just destroy trans people’s lives and prosecute them out of existence, but everyone who supports them too. And if that doesn’t terrify you, try thinking about it again.
Re:
Color me shocked. /s
The same treasonous curs who hate minorities, weaponize history and women want to murder those folk but won’t be honest about their intentions?
It’s like they don’t care where it leads to.
I am thinking that the movement fur an independent Republic of Pacifica happened, that wouid screw up their anti porn agenda
Websites in the new country wouid not be subject to the laws of the remaining United States
Any website in Pacifica, if that country existed now, would not be subject to.any laws in the remaining United States
The Constitution fir Pacifica woukd prohibit the country from extraditing it’s citizens to the USA
A Pacifican could, before travelling, break into law enforcement computer networks in the remaining USA and erase those warrants
And before you say cfaa, the cfaa would have no jurisdiction in Pacifica
The CFAA has no jurisdiction abroad so someone in Pacifica who did that could not be prosecuted in the United states
And then there is the dmca
People who want certain features removed from.theur cars computers could cross the border into Pacifica and get it done at shops in Pacifica. The dmca wouid have zero jurisdiction in Pacifica