No, it’s not porn. Stop being deliberately obtuse. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/pornography Pornography–"porn" or "porno" for short–is material that depicts nudity or sexual acts for the purpose of sexual stimulation. However, the presence of nudity or sexual acts in piece of media does not necessarily make that media pornographic if the purpose of that media form is something other than sexual stimulation If you actually read the books you’d know they weren’t intended for sexual stimulation. And what is appropriate for a high school student is different than what’s appropriate for a kindergartner. You can’t post the word beetch on DCUM. That’s not really a test of anything.
|
+1 Women don’t even get the anatomy scan until 20w. |
It’s restricting it further. No further restrictions. Keep the government out of people’s personal reproductive decisions. The end. |
+1 |
Crickets... as expected. |
Says the LWNJ who embodies every word in that statement. Wow. |
Interesting that you're deliberately leaving out the usual caveats - "exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother." But it's totally understandable that you continue to mislead, gaslight, and flat-out lie to anyone you can get to listen to you. |
You have got to be kidding. By now, we've all seen the pictures depicting two girls having oral sex (with a dildo), the description of the vibrator, the phone/texting sex conversation, the description and recollection of a childhood sexual experience, etc. Good grief. You seem intent on gaslighting away the graphically sexual images in these books. Talk about deliberately obtuse. No one takes you seriously at this point. |
How are those “caveats” working so far in the states th at claim to have them? |
None of those "usual caveats" applies to the horrific situation described by the OP, where an anatomy scan reveals a severe congenital defect that makes the pregnancy non-viable. Forcing someone to carry that pregnancy is beyond cruel. And if the many draconian abortion bans enacted gleefully by far-right Republicans after Dobbs are any indication, those "usual caveats" may be stripped out altogether. Many red states have enacted bans with no exceptions for the woman's health, rape, incest, or fetal anomalies. OP is right that Youngkin said he'd sign any abortion ban that came to his desk. Where is the lie, exactly? |
It was answered at least once. You have reading trouble? |
It takes a special sort of sheltered conservative fuddy-duddy not to understand that fiction can describe sex, or even depict sex, in ways that aren't sexual arousing or intended to be. |
You refuse to acknowledge the actual definition of porn. Mature content doesn’t mean “porn”. They weren’t intended for sexual stimulation. I agree with the PP who said this: “And your hyperbole about "porn" is ridiculous. You know that, you just argue everything in bad faith. We see you clearly.” Just like we can all clearly see the definition of porn. And those of us who have actually read these books know that these books aren’t porn. |
| Three issues are going to drive the VA elections; they are in order - 1) economy, 2) crime, and 3) education. Where the independents will focus while the D and R bases cancel each other out on abortion. As this thread is proving. |
Your crime narrative is fictional. “When it comes to the main issues on the minds of Virginians going into the election, 27% of those polled said the economy and inflation were top of mind, while 17% said abortion and 12% said K-12 education.” https://www.13newsnow.com/amp/article/news/politics/elections/top-voter-issues-in-2023-virginia-election-the-economy-abortion-education-wason-center-poll/291-5a552053-b6b1-434a-bbdb-73a230bf14ca |