If we don't get a section 230 for payment processors we're looking at serious consequences for 1A because everything will be a civil suit away from getting blacklisted. Economist reported that adult performers are having trouble keeping bank accounts open -- as soon as a bank or payment processor finds out it's porn-related it gets nuked. Now that this is established practice, what's going to happen when Visa/MC gets sued for handling payments to do with disagreeable political speech? Our right to freedom of speech is currently only as strong as what Visa/MC are willing to defend in court, or you'd better be willing to live without any access to the banking system -- even if you're a gazillionaire who doesn't have to work, you've got to keep your money somewhere (and satisfy KYC).

Even if somebody thinks certain speech should be censored, I doubt they'd want what they consider unsavory speech being driven to use a payment system like Bitcoin, and for that to become the norm, it would open up much more potential for abuse.

▲ MBCook 7 days ago | parent [-]

This is not the administration to ask for that.

▲ qball 7 days ago | parent [-]

Why not? Payment processors have done it to guns just as much as they've done it to porn, both under the Obama administration.

▲ MBCook 7 days ago | parent | next [-]

I think they would be far more likely to support a gun exception than a general “no moralizing” rule.

They seem totally fine with the age checks many states are enacting for porn sites. The Republican Party loves slagging pedophiles (real or imagined) and hating on LGBTQIA+ people or trying to make their lives as difficult/horrible as possible.

Yeah some games delisted were horrible. One of the main offenders had already been pulled as soon as Steam (or was it Itch) was notified. But they still used it as evidence. The platforms were policing themselves well.

But not only did gratuitous porn games and abuse games get delisted, lots of games on related to inclusiveness of LGBTQIA+ did too from what I’m seeing from developers on social media.

I suspect if anything the administration would be happy to let people use this as yet another hammer in their culture war against such people existing.

That’s why.

▲ atmavatar 7 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Because one of the goals of project 2025 is to make porn illegal.

    Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection. Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women. Their product is as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime. Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered.

Bonus: it also aims to eliminate sex ed.

    eliminate central promotion of abortion; comprehensive
    sexuality education; and the new woke gender ideology

▲

johnnyanmac 7 days ago | parent | next [-]

So they want to not have women abort children, but also not have them aware of how their bodies and sex works. Surely not a formula for a dysfunctional future generation.

	▲	evan_ 7 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It’s not a contradiction at all, they want women to get knocked up as early as possible because (the thought is) that makes them easier to control. That’s what all this “tradwife” propaganda is about.
	▲	__MatrixMan__ 7 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		That they really want is to eliminate any sort of ground truth so that whoever holds the power can resolve related issues by fiat. Less policy, more kissing the ring and such. This way, abusers can disagree about what constitutes abuse in private, but can form a bloc in public, unifying around the common ground that the boss's whims should be respected in matters where the bandying about of facts is taboo. Might makes right, etc.

▲

6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

GoblinSlayer 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

>registered sex offenders

Does that term still have any meaning?