Michigan bill seeks total ban on porn - and VPNs along with it

midian182

Posts: 11,790   +179
Staff member
WTF?! An increasing number of states and even countries are introducing age-verification systems to prevent minors from accessing adult websites. For adults unwilling to hand over personal details such as facial scans, VPNs have offered a workaround. But six Michigan Republican representatives have introduced a bill that would completely ban not only porn for everyone in the state but also VPNs. It also proposes placing porn distributors on the sex offenders registry and banning depictions of transgender people.

Rep. Josh Schriver of Oxford, the lead sponsor of House Bill 4938, named the Anti-corruption of Public Morals Act, wrote that its "measures defend children, safeguard our communities, and put families first."

"Right now, we have a situation where you have over 90% of youth under the age of 18 who have seen pornography it's killing our drive it's killing our morality our moral and it's something that has no place is western civilization," Schriver said.

The act would prohibit the distribution of "real, animated, digitally generated, written, or auditory" depictions of sexual acts. This appears to cover quite an extensive range of subjects, right down to "erotic autonomous sensory meridian response content, moaning, or sensual voice content."

Moreover, the rules would force internet service providers to monitor and block "known circumvention tools." These are defined as "any software, hardware, or service designed to bypass internet filtering mechanisms or content restrictions, including virtual private networks (VPNs), proxy servers, and encrypted tunneling methods to evade content restrictions."

It adds that the promotion or sale of tools used to access prohibited material in the state is also banned.

Another section of the act covers transgender individuals, banning material "that includes a disconnection between biology and gender by an individual of one biological sex imitating, depicting, or representing themselves to be of the other biological sex."

If the bill becomes law, those who violate the rules could face a maximum prison sentence of 20 years and/or a $100,000 fine. That increases to up to 25 years in prison and/or a $150,000 fine if more than 100 pieces of prohibited material are involved.

Schriver's X post highlights how pornography providers would be placed on the sex offenders register. It's unclear exactly how such a proposal would work in practice.

The bill has been referred to the Committee on Judiciary. There is currently no meeting scheduled to review proposed law. In the unlikely event it does become a law, the bill would take effect after 90 days.

Banning VPNs and even their advertising sounds like something you'd expect to find only in countries like China, Russia, and Iran, but what was once inconceivable is starting to look possible. The UK government is said to be examining the use of the software in light of the Online Safety Act and considering technical measures to improve compliance with the act. In reality, completely banning their use would likely be unenforceable and lead to widespread outcry.

Permalink to story:

 
I'm an elder millennial, and I'm willing to give boomers (my parent's generation) a bit of a pass on the kind of crazy **** I was able to see online when growing up. It was brand new, there wasn't really anything like it before, it was supposed to "bring humanity together" so on and so forth.

But Gen X and Millennials (and Gen Z who are old enough to have kids now) who are giving their kids unfettered access to the internet... what the **** are these people smoking?

Let's get some congress critters to introduce the "Be a ****ing Parent, not a Friend" act that can include line items like:

- If you give a child younger than 16 a smart phone/tablet, straight to jail.
- If your kid throws a little ***** fit because they really really want a smart phone and you cave, straight to jail.
- If your kid is allowed to have private access to a computer (I.e. their room or the computer is unlocked while you're not home), straight to jail.
- Your kid has to go outside and touch grass at least once a day.
- Any complaining from parents along the lines of "but being a parent is like totes really really hard", congrats death penalty.

For those of you who lack a sense of humor or do not recognize sardonic humor, this is a joke with a healthy helping of truthful opinion included.
 
Porn is bad. And when you don't realize that it makes you bad as well. Any attempt to stem the flow of perversion to perverts is a good thing
 
Porn is bad. And when you don't realize that it makes you bad as well. Any attempt to stem the flow of perversion to perverts is a good thing
Exposure to religious leaders and self-righteous politicians that think they know what is good for everyone is bad. Any attempt to stem the flow of freedom of choice based on someone's ill conceived ideas of how others should act is bad and, as a matter of settled constitutional law, is an infringement of 1st Amendment Rights - in the US at least. Surrender the 1st amendment in any context, it won't be long before its surrendered in all contexts for everyone.

What people do in their private space is their business. Good luck keeping porn out of the hands of babes.
 
I'm an elder millennial, and I'm willing to give boomers (my parent's generation) a bit of a pass on the kind of crazy **** I was able to see online when growing up. It was brand new, there wasn't really anything like it before, it was supposed to "bring humanity together" so on and so forth.

But Gen X and Millennials (and Gen Z who are old enough to have kids now) who are giving their kids unfettered access to the internet... what the **** are these people smoking?

Let's get some congress critters to introduce the "Be a ****ing Parent, not a Friend" act that can include line items like:

- If you give a child younger than 16 a smart phone/tablet, straight to jail.
- If your kid throws a little ***** fit because they really really want a smart phone and you cave, straight to jail.
- If your kid is allowed to have private access to a computer (I.e. their room or the computer is unlocked while you're not home), straight to jail.
- Your kid has to go outside and touch grass at least once a day.
- Any complaining from parents along the lines of "but being a parent is like totes really really hard", congrats death penalty.

For those of you who lack a sense of humor or do not recognize sardonic humor, this is a joke with a healthy helping of truthful opinion included.
I get the joke but many people in our country probably believe this and want this in reality!

Fascism is running wild.
 
"Rep. Josh Schriver of Oxford, the lead sponsor of House Bill 4938, named the Anti-corruption of Public Morals Act, wrote that its "measures defend children, safeguard our communities, and put families first."

@midian182 What Mr. Schriver really needs, is a snoot full of Peruvian marching powder, and a really hot secretary ** with all the morals of an alley cat. He wouldn't be wasting his time pontificating on bullsh!t like this bill. (That's assuming he doesn't already have these, and the nose candy isn't just making him run his mouth a bit too much).

** "On the edge of seventeen". (With apologies to Stevie Nicks.)
 
It’s true that many minors already have access to adult content stored locally on their devices and let’s be honest—teenagers’ curiosity and hormones are powerful forces. Trying to block every possible avenue feels like trying to stop a river with a sieve. If a club plays music you dislike, you don’t demand the DJ change the playlist; you simply walk out. Similarly, if someone isn’t a fan of porn, they can choose to avoid it themselves. The majority of people do consume it, while those who don’t are a smaller group. Ultimately, decisions about what’s appropriate should rest with parents, not the state. Some parents might even view it as educational rather than harmful.

If lawmakers genuinely believe the internet is more harmful than helpful, perhaps they should consider a full ban—no internet, no digital distractions for Michigan. Let’s go back to phone calls, faxes and good old face-to-face conversations. But here’s the catch: even without the internet, kids might still have that “local stash” of content in their phones. So, where does that leave us? Maybe the real solution lies in open conversations between parents and children, rather than sweeping bans that feel more like overreach than protection.

The website didn’t force the kid to open the browser and type in the address bar or Google “www.porn-something.” The kid, on their own autonomy and will, chose to do it(repeatably).

If they want to suppress the teenager’s sex drive expression, then they should start by separating children by gender and placing them in separate schools(with dress code) located far away from each other, which could be and a more effective "solution".
 
Last edited:
There are also so many school shootings in the us, perhaps someone should fix that first?
That's easy. These kidz should be getting laid more, preferably after watching porn to learn how it's done.
I mean take stock of it yourself, what's your priority after sex, lighting up a cigarette, or shooting up an elementary school?

WARNING: Cigarette smoking is harmful to your health. This in spite of the fact, that the average 9 mil in the wrong hands will kill you a whole lot quicker.
 
Back