Amazon.com Widgets

Should government be involved in limiting Internet pornography?

  • No responses have been submitted.
  • They should not even think of touching it.

    Although many find porn or some elements of porn immoral, it is a form of expression protected by the Constitution of the United States of America, if we are talking about America here.

    In general, a government should still not limit internet porn because, for a lot of people, it is almost like an outlet for those who do not have sexual interactions. Now, there are a lot of people who watch it and still rape, peep, etc., but they should not be held as the prime example of all porn viewers. For example, if child pornography was legal, child molesters should not be held as evidence of what all child porn viewers do.

    Not all of these people are rapists, just people satisfying a hunger that can be easily met with the internet. A lot of people will disagree with the child porn part, but getting rid of child porn gives pedophiles no outlet to meet their hunger and could possibly lead them to actually rape a child.

    Whether one agrees or disagrees with me, I hope one can understand what I am trying to say.

  • The government should not be involved in limiting Internet pornograph.

    The right to make, distribute, and view pornography is protected by the First Amendment. The government has no reason to take away the people's right to have pornography. Viewing pornography is a healthy leisure activity. As long as the creators of pornography consent to any sex acts involved, no crime has been committed.

  • They should not.

    The only type of Internet porn that should be limited is stuff that is illegal, IE: child pornography. Porn is a completely natural thing that most people look at, there's no downsides to looking at porn and frankly, I don't believe the Internet should be government censored at all, including most porn.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.