this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
246 points (96.9% liked)

Privacy

4176 readers
51 users here now

A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy

Rules:

  1. Be civil
  2. No spam posting
  3. Keep posts on-topic
  4. No trolling

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/17994614

Learn more at defeatproject2025.org

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee 30 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't understand this.

The battle to stop people watching porn was lost many thousands of years ago.

[โ€“] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 61 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Criminalizing porn means that nearly everyone is a criminal. So you can be arrested at any time those in power want to arrest you without having to find a legitimate reason.

[โ€“] useyourmainfinger@lemmy.world 17 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That's it, you nailed it, that's exactly what they want..!

[โ€“] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago

I present Exhibit A: Weed.

[โ€“] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 8 points 3 months ago

Yeah that selective enforcement clause is a powerful tool if you're a dickhead

[โ€“] JustZ@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

That's exactly right. It's the facts of the case of Mapp v. Ohio.

Cops were looking for the boyfriend and evidence of numbers running. They forced the door and came in without a warrant and arrested her for pornography. It was in a box in the basement, she didn't even know it was there.

The statute they charged her under, I forgot the exact amount of time, but nobody had been charged under it in like twenty years or something.

Jury convicted her in twenty minutes for the porn.

The liberal Supreme Court of the day that gave us most of our civil rights, the Earl Warren Court, reversed her conviction based on the illegal, warrantless search.

The whole thing was a ploy to get her to testify against her boyfriend, which she ultimately refused to do before her case got tossed out. They didn't care about the porn, it was pretextual.

https://ballotpedia.org/Mapp_v._Ohio

[โ€“] makeasnek@lemmy.ml 25 points 3 months ago

If you are an American and care about privacy:

  • Write your representatives. Your message can be as simple as "I care about privacy". It's important they know you are watching their votes.
  • Participate in elections, particularly downballot elections. Congressional makeup at the federal and state level matters a lot more for these kinds of things than who is president. Many recent laws like "right to repair" etc have happened at the state level since you can bypass federal congressional gridlock.
  • Participate in primaries. Most Americans do not vote, most voters do not vote in primaries. If you don't like having to choose "the lesser of two evils", primaries give you much much more choice to express your preferences. As a primary voter, you have an outsized influence on the electoral system and can help determine the options other people get to choose from.
  • Donate to PACs and non-profits working to protect your right to privacy. The EFF is an awesome non-profit. One benefit of donating to PACs is that they keep an eye on races across the country and help find and fund candidates who will advanced privacy legislation.
  • "Vote with your dollar" when you buy things. In many cases, your purchasing power outweighs the political power of your vote.
[โ€“] Rev3rze@feddit.nl 22 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

This is the exact reason people tell you you're wrong when you say "I don't have anything to hide" in the face of anti-privacy laws.

If you have used your ID to access porn sites they already have you on the list. You've put yourself on it, even. If Project 2025 succeeds in criminalizing porn users then guess what? You're on the list to get arrested and shipped off to prison to go be a ~~slave~~ productive countryman.

[โ€“] Cosmos7349@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

"I don't have anything to hide" is playing with fire, because you aren't the one making the rules.

[โ€“] ShadowRam@fedia.io 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Do they make a compelling reason as to why it should be outlawed?

What would it accomplish?

[โ€“] SGG@lemmy.world 30 points 3 months ago

Control, and a means of targeting anyone who they want to paint as "the other".

Did you hear what happened to Jimmy? Taken away to prison because he looked at GILF content.

It's only one step away from all the people who mysteriously fall out of windows in Russia.

[โ€“] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Same as most of the other gibberish in P2025, for moral, ethical, and societal wellness "reasons." Their stated goal is to turn society back to more Christian values, but it's really a mechanism to throw anyone in jail for any reason.

[โ€“] JustZ@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Also to deny women an empowering and enriching form of labor. Have to keep them poor, barefoot in the kitchen.

That chick who founded OnlyFans, driving around in Ferraris with tens of millions in the bank, that's their worst nightmare.

[โ€“] JustZ@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

This has always been the Republican plan. They've been going after pornographers as long as I can remember.

"Why do I have to go to jail for your freedom?" - Larry Flint.

[โ€“] thericcer@reddthat.com 0 points 3 months ago

Seems to me that people who produce and distribute are not those that consume it...

[โ€“] ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub -1 points 3 months ago

Alright, that does it. That's the final straw

[โ€“] StaySquared@lemmy.world -3 points 3 months ago

Ohhh going after the porn industry? That's anti-semitic as fk!