I don't think I argue that AT ALL, let alone "exaggerate it". I argue that it's a bad idea to give government more power, and that it won't work.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JRstract
> they already have this power legally, they do? that's not my understanding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_obscenity_law#Court_cases_on_obscenity …
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JRstract
you're telling me that I was speaking on topic X, not topics Y and Z, which are of interest to you. That's correct; I was. Arguing that porn bans (a) give too much power to government, (b) will be used to hurt our team, not theirs, and (c) won't work ...was the case I made.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JRstract
I'm not sure your goal in this conversation. I've explained it's a very very bad idea, and you want to argue, "no, actually, I've got gasoline ... well, OK, I don't have it yet, but I could get it with just a few changes". And then you're showing me tweets to support that? >>>
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JRstract
I think this is the non central fallacy - we already have laws that make it illegal to kill people and eat them, therefore there's no implementation problem AT ALL with banning meat eating (1 meat type down, 10 more to go) these laws work, to the degree that they do, bc >>>
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
demand is so rare, and cultural revulsion is so high we can arrest (some) kiddie porn viewers bc the guy at the Genius Bar is a willing reporter why is it that a ban on behavior that 0.001% do works but a ban on behavior of 50% of people doesn't ?
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.