Yes. Zero of any worth or benefit comes from it.
What good is freedom that does not last because society rots so much it crumbles?
Better a measure of freedom that last for 10,000 years, than total freedom for 50 years, with next to none for the 9,950 years later.
Look around your society, what good freedom when you are ruled by Jews, Negroes and Communists taking everything of valuer that LASTS from your people?
People who "need' porn are total losers. Scum.
>Consenting adults creating/sharing that content should never be illegal.
But here you just show that you are orientated by ideology put into your brain, not by your own thoughts.
A thinking person will find a balancing point. They will look at CONSEQUENCE.
Does allowing this thing deliver more good, or more bad?
What are the SYSTEMIC consequences of upholding this freedom?
My rationale is that it offers little of value, and does real harm, and aligns with - judging by history and the present - deterioration to destruction, not upholding what is magnificent.
A man loyal to his people, must weight the CONSEQUENCES to his people of his ideology.
"everything consenting should be allowed even if it is harmful to society" delivers the Weimar world we live in. That we are DYING and losing our self-determination in.
Why apart from ideological commitment (i.e. something like a religion you have put BEYOND thought) do you have to support keeping pornography around?
>What good is society if there is no freedom?
My point to you exactly.
If your maximise freedom to such an extent that society falls apart.. given it is society that guarantees your freedoms…
..where to with your freedom then?
Societies need to be mindful of their HEALTH, or they simply get taken over by others &/or destroyed.
A White man in 1950's America, was more free than he is in 2022 America. Freedom to be degenerate (gradually opened up in America since the 50's) has consequences.
Loss of your society as a functional entity that protects the interests of its founding stock is one.
A society that enforces high morals, receives behaviour from its citizens that is conducive to their health and that of society.
>Who are you to allow or not allow others to do something?
This is much easier to answer than you think.
Each person has free will.
Each person has duties they can pick up or ignore.
Duties I would posit to you an Aryan should pick up, is commitment to honour, right behaviour, morality, and what is good for his people.
This involves a commitment to the freedom of his people, but this is not divorced the other elements entirely, and does not over-ride them.
A moral person chooses to do what they think is right.
A choice to allow something because a person thinks it is right, and another person's choice to disallow something thus are equivalent.
Both are exercising free will, to do what they think is right.
Societies operate via input from its members in such a way, with the relative POWER of each side, not its morality or reasonableness, governing which orientation will come to the fore.. which choice is made.
I simply say to you, making a choice that harms the people, and sends them on the wrong path, in a way that sees them seriously harmed, is one a person who cares for his people, may decide to turn against.
Freedom is a good. But excesses of freedom lead to freedom itself being lost.
For example, freedom to sell your property to whoever you want. If exercised, without boundaries, a nation will be purchased out from under its people, RENDERING THEM POWERLESS to decide their own fate, as it is exercised by the people that 'bought' and moved in.
So restrictions on freedom will always be present, at the very least to sustainably maintain freedom.
If you are not prepared to face reality as it is, you simply aid freedom being taken from your people without realising it.
Now I am not saying that there is not room to disagree on whether pornography crosses that line, but to be ideologically imposed to such lines being drawn somewhere, is to fail to realise that freedom requires limits to be sustained.
It was the freedoms granted, that let the cabal take control of society.
>Typical fascists. "Freedoms" must be controlled, regulated, taxed, licensed, permitted, monitored, & censored…for the greater good.
Or else you get a society controlled by Jews, moving your people out of existence while infinity niggers get affirmative action, and rape your daughter.
Tell me, how do you think society got to where it is, without the freedom being granted to people to take it there?
Do you LIKE your current society as it is, and the direction it is headed in?
Do you think Weimar Germany, preferable to Hitler's Germany? For an ethnic German?
THEY disagreed with you.
Do you think 2022 America is better than 1950's America?
>But, but, but, the laws of the Old Testament must be obeyed or God will destroy our cities with fire and brimstone.
I did not reference religion at all.
I referenced a person's duty to their race, their folk, their people, a d their society, and their internal sense of morality.
Interesting that you try to tackle the argument put to you dishonestly though.
Is being honest in manner hard?
Degenerate with porn, degenerate in manner too?
>You sound like Satan, preaching authority rather than freedom.
Why look at how Jewish you are! A person stands up against porn, and you have them as being against God, instead of the opposite.
No, Anon, Satanism has as its main tenet: "do as thou wilt", God had rules. His UNIVERSE is based on rules.
That which does not follow the rules of the universe, is DISSOLVED by the universe. The law of action & reaction.
Which is what I put to you, what is the REACTION to a society that embraces personal (unbounded individualistic) freedom and porn?
Why a WEIMAR society. Modern USA. A society headed precisely for the junk-heap unless it changes its orientation.
What good is supporting an orientation that is self-defeating and harms one's own people and society? Taking away that which you wanted (alleged) to protect in the first place (across multiple generations)?
What good a freedom that ends up seeing freedom taken away?
My guiding motto is that "we should be kind, but not stupid".
Allowing masses of others into our societies was kind, but stupid. So should not have happened.
I'd be happy to say porn belongs in the same bucket. Being expansive with freedoms offered is kind… but in some cases, does it not end up stupid?
We should avoid, as a people, doing stupid things. Adhering to ideology, for no other reason except to religiously glom to it, in the face of harm, is stupid.
And the society you are in does get to make that decree over your desires. As the members of society have their right to free will, which includes the right to work to set the rules in their society they want.
You also have the right to oppose them, and exercise your free will. But your actual rights extend no further than that. That is all the universe allows any lifeform. The right to think, and try. Not succeed. Success (or not) comes from the play out of factors, not rights.
>The cabal comitted "crimes" and exempted themselves from prosecution, while threatening prosecution of others to gain control.
The cabal took control because first, people were granted the freedom to MIGRATE. And so the cabals agents entered.
Then they took the next step by being able to MONOPOLISE INDUSTRIES, as they were given the freedom to enter them, and others to sell to them.
Then monopolising various industries inclusive of communications & media, and finance, they were able to take control of the government, the intelligence services, the armed forces AND the population's thoughts, and thus, the entire population and society and its direction.
Had the society been able to keep its prohibitions against certain acts, i.e. its willingness to prohibit certain races, or acts, then that take over would not have been able to progress.
Pornography, LGBTQ rights, women in the workforce, anti-racism etc all enabled the folk of the nation, to be reduced to a minority within their own nation.. and so, without any control over it.
The weight of racial & religious aliens, and brainwashed traitors in their own midst, was elevated to a level of power above their own.
And so their freedom of association, speech, gun rights and so on were taken, and are in the process of being further taken.
And this is a process that repeats through history.
Societies start quite restrictive, this allows them to funnel their energy into success, this delivers wealth, and then comfort, and then willingness to INDULGE in excess freedoms, and then no longer still channeling successful behaviours, they fall under the weight of what they allow.
For the 10,000 years they spend going up.. RESTRICTIVE. For the 50 years they spend living on the built up fat and wealth of this success, freedom, and then collapse as that wealth dissipates with the lack of proper behaviour, and the takeover of society by those who would pillage it, and take away the freedoms of those they pillage, to enable better pillaging.
>So you claim free will, but want to deny others theirs?
Do you understand so little?
Free will is your ability to think and TRY to progress what you choose to progress.
You are free to try to progress your idea of freedom to others, such that they take it up. As am I.
In my society that bans porn you are free similarly. And to make it and distribute it similarly.
But also similarly, others have the right to exercise their free will, to choose actions against you, or have society impose some consequences on you.
That is free will as it REALLY is. Everything else is not "rights" it is power & circumstance.
The universe gave you the right to try. Nothing more. And since it gave everyone else the same right, the right to use their free will to have things turn out different to how you'd choose, if that is what they so choose.
Think about if it was not as I say.
if you think that your conception of rights is in volatile & should be upheld everywhere.
Then even if a society has 100,000,000 peoples in it, that they want to restrict something, and one does not, you say, well it should not be.
So what of the right of others to live in a society of their choosing?
You would throw out the rights of everyone, and far more important rights, than a right to pornography.
The group right to self-determination (to choose the rules it will live under) surely outweighs the right of an individual to do what they want, without consequence for transgressing the wishes of the rest.
And in any case, that is the way it will be in empirical reality. No matter act you claim about the way rights should be ordered, in practice your opinion has no weight at all. Only the relative power of people who hold your opinion or hold an alternate.
Showing conclusively that power trumps rights.
Free will dictates the right to choose one's own actions & orientation. You would refuse people this right.
You fail at both ends.. at upholding rights from a bottom up proposition, and top down.
"but just your opinion in what is right & wrong matters right"? You are right yes?
(because the tv said so.. but in any case…)
In practice as described the reality is moot.
We contest the space:
your "it should be this way" against my "it works better for us if it is not"
Practicality with an eye to the real world, vs wishful thinking and adherence to an ideology plucked out of the air (fed by the tv).