• Teon@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      And then they lower the age that kids can get married to 14/15 (pedos!), and change labor laws so pre-teens can work in dangerous jobs or serve alcohol.
      If they want to protect “children”, we need Xtra restrictive gun laws, and child abuse laws. Who protects children from abuse at home?
      Not conservatives, they are the ones behind all this.

    • Melpomene@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is absolutely always one of those two, and they try this shit every session. Better solution? Kick any politician who signs off on these bills out of office and make it crystal clear that they’ve been booted because they’re anti-speech and anti-privacy.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s never about kids. If they gave half a fuck about kids, we’d have free school lunches and teachers would be paid a fair salary.

      So long as the internet is around to distribute fact-checks and officer-involved homicide videos they have no plausible lies by which the 80% of us in poverty or precarity should tolerate the abuse of plutocrats and capitalists.

      So this is a first amendment issue: it’s about suppression of political speech. It always was 🌍 👩‍🚀 🔫 👨‍🚀 🌑

  • mPony@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    every time they say it’s to “protect the children” or “protect freedom” it is invariably neither.

  • viliam@feddit.ch
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fine, so who will be judging if there’s a depressive content on the internet, a psychologist? Also how about non-US sites, will they be banned or something?

  • salient_one@lemmy.villa-straylight.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    Perhaps politicians should concentrate on making it so there’s less depressing stuff in the world for anyone to see and hear, and not creating more of it with things like this rubbish bill. 🤷‍♀️

  • Natha@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Isn’t it something that China has been doing for a while? In their version, it’s called ‘spreading positive energy’.

    • NormalC@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s almost like everything the US said about China was just a projection of their own insecurities.

      It might get to a point where China actually is relatively more liberating than “stable democracies” in internet access.

  • WhyDoesntThisThingWork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This doesn’t seem different from what many if not most major platforms are already doing voluntarily. Just replace the word “depressing” with the word “toxic” and suddenly everyone will support this.