Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments In Website Age Verification Case Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton

[@Zieksmythe]

This is a sad but apparent truth as how lacking ppl will be held accountable for their children. Heaven forbid you actually have to parent your child…

[@flyingchimp12]

It’s almost like in 2025 children can access the content no matter how a parent parents. Are you just going to stand behind your child all day and night?

[@Zieksmythe]

@ or are you going to use the already in place guardrails of site blocking and content filtering, and also maybe your 12 year old doesn’t need a smart phone? Don’t rely on the government to parent your children.

[@ReadMoreBooks80]

Both of you are correct. Parent as best you can, the world will still constantly try to corrupt your child. Good luck and thanks for playing.

[@agrady7216]

If the FSC is going to be suing, they shouldn’t really be suing the states, they should also sue the groups that are pushing for these laws.

[@alphiegrrr1868]

Attestation of age should be sufficient since there is no way to guarantee we won't some day learn of a "data mismanagement" incident in which there will be a publicly available, freely accessible, totally searchable list of matching names, faces, and pornographic browsing histories published online.

[@michah321]

Kids will just steal their parents ID when they are in the bathroom or asleep. Or they will use a vpn and go out of the country.

[@Zieksmythe]

They literally said what parent is more tech savvy than their teen, that alone implies they will find a way to skirt this where a less tech savvy adult will not…

[@michah321]

@Zieksmythe yes. And whatever restrictions they create, they will be overcome by teens. Good parents talk to their children rather than scrambling to block access and continue to pretend they are 8 years old

[@AppalachianMountaineer1863]

There is no proper way to prevent the issue without infringing on others rights. I’m standing in the middle of this. I support laws that help to prevent children from accessing that type of material, however I also support the individual rights of those that wish to partake in viewing said materials in a manner that doesn’t require them to input personal identifiers into a system. We’ve seen how hacks happen and information gets leaked.

[@Zieksmythe]

It’s called be a parent. Don’t rely on a government to raise or protect your child. That’s a failure as a parent

[@R0bstar-YT]

Frankly, I feel this legislation was drafted with more consideration for the convenience in its implementation than as an initiative of advocacy for the welfare of children. I too support laws to protect children from harm, but what I abhor are the performative gestures of self-serving lawmakers that don't care about the victims as much as they do their own agendas. The approach here was clearly low effort and ultimately ineffectual, just like the content filters that were deemed insufficient.

[@dudeman0811]

.... you guys DID watch the video of russ vought clearly stating he's been Trying to get rid of the porn for years and wants a national ban on porn, right? There is no standing on the middle of this because it's something else in disguise as "OH DEAR THE CHILDREN"

[@sariahforth1721]

They should buy a dvd then. There’s no sane argument for this. By using the internet alone you give away your data. This not wanting to put your id in argument is baloney

[@Zieksmythe]

@@sariahforth1721 you should not have to submit such detailed information to be subject to potential hackers. That’s the argument, you as a parent need to take responsibility for parenting your child, not rely on government. That’s a danger in its own right. It’s kinda sad that ppl don’t see that