>>328289 >It's seeming more and more like free speech was a mistake as I read more and more pro-porn arguments. <Everyone is stupid but me Fuck off!

>>328268 What are you reading? It clearly stated that it's an addiction. How does that not mean "bad" to you? >The same webpage even admits that Playboy is still safe Because still images available in heavily limited number requiring you to purchase them are not a superstimulus like infinite internet porn.

>>328291 >Fuck off! I was here first. You only jumped in after the porno discussion was heavily underway.

>>328279 ><Looking at Breasts Can Actually Make You Live Longer That's a correlative study. It's the same retard logic that says masturbation stops prostate cancer.

Does the concept of moderation not exist for you faggots? There's nothing wrong with indulging eros, as long as you keep it in control. If you don't have the strength to maintain control over eros, then do whatever you have to do to maintain balance. Don't be a porn-addicted coomer, but don't be a sexless puritan either.

>>328283 >americans haven't had a freedom addiction for over a century. And when do you think the Jews embedded themselves?

>>328285 This line of reasoning that regulation is inherently bad is just reactionary ancap retardation to living under a bad government. If you want good government you have to make it yourself. It's just not easy.

>>328292 >It clearly stated that it's an addiction. https://archive.ph/GUDHi#selection-755.29-755.96 <making internet porn uniquely compelling, and potentially addictive >Because still images available in heavily limited number <All porn is bad. No not that kind of porn. That kind of porn is safe. No, the porn that's bad for you is all the porn that I say is bad for because...REASONS!!! >>328295 >Does the concept of moderation not exist for you faggots? That's because they're porn addicts, themselves, and trying to act holier than thou in order make themselves seem more righteous.

>>328295 >Does the concept of moderation not exist for you faggots? You can't smoke cancer sticks "in moderation". Porn is the same.

>>328299 >You can't smoke cancer sticks "in moderation". Yes, you can.

>>881268 >>881268 >>881268 >>881268 >>881268 NEW NUTS

>>328295 >Does the concept of moderation not exist for you faggots? Does the concept of moderation not exist for this board? Where the mods/BO to clean up the drm spam?

>>328273 Hello Aaaron how are you doing?

>>328298 ><All porn is bad. No not that kind of porn. That kind of porn is safe. No, the porn that's bad for you is all the porn that I say is bad for because...REASONS!!! I did state earlier that it should be banned or heavily regulated. >potentially addictive This phrase is used only three times, and one of the times it's used, drugs are described as "potentially addictive". Does that fact that opioids are only "potentially addictive" instead of "100% of the time addictive" make you consider them not an addictive drug? Stop playing semantics and address the substance of the article and the studies it cites.

>>327768 Lucky, the only arcade cabinets I had access too were that siphons fighting game & House of the Dead 3 (or was it 4?) at my local movie theater.

>>328300 Yeah, you "can quit anytime you want", I'm sure.

>>328302 >Not asking them to clean up the porn derail as well

>>328304 >a century ago america decided to give the other 50% of the population voting rights which they then used alongside sexual bargaining to further their own political agendas that had nothing to do with freedom. Jews spearheaded feminism and giving women rights. It's well documented. They're proud of it even.

>>328305 >I did state earlier that it should be banned or heavily regulated. And, you can fuck off if that's your stance. >Does that fact that opioids are only "potentially addictive" instead of "100% of the time addictive" make you consider them not an addictive drug? Many drugs are not addictive, themselves. It's how they make you feel that's addictive. In the particular case of opioids, it's because opioids cause you to "feel nothing", which becomes an addictive feeling. >>328307 Yes, you can.

>>328311 /pol/fag Brenton Tarrant literally killed our home because we let crazies like him live two boards down. Everybody who even so much as brings him up (see: you) should be handed a permanent ban. Acid should release a statement disavowing Tarrant and his sympathizers and they should all be BoS here on our website 8chan.moe

>>328310 >Many drugs are not addictive, themselves. It's how they make you feel that's addictive. In the particular case of opioids, it's because opioids cause you to "feel nothing", which becomes an addictive feeling. More semantics just to claim actual addictive drugs aren't addictive. >Yes, you can. I know people that have quit meth that want to quit smoking because they know and understand it's bad for them and actively advocated for other people to never pick up smoking, but still cannot.

>>328313 >/pol/fag Brenton Tarrant literally killed our home because we let crazies like him live two boards down He never used 8/pol/. He livestreamed to faceberg. A link to the livestream was posted by someone else after the video already had many viewers.

>>328314 >More semantics The entire article you linked is about semantics. If you're going to complain about someone doing the same thing, then you can fuck off. >I know people that have quit meth that want to quit smoking Funny, I know people who stopped smoking over something as simply as a two cent increase in the price of a pack. Sounds like your friends lack self control.

>>328315 Do you disavow? Why won't you disavow? You need to disavow.

>>328316 >The entire article you linked is about semantics. No, they're not using wordplay, they're using neuroscience and the facts of neuroplasticity. >Funny, I know people who stopped smoking over something as simply as a two cent increase in the price of a pack. I just went over with you in two different way how something not having a 100% addiction rate doesn't mean it's not addictive and you're repeating that same fallacy only two posts later. You're also ignoring how I demonstrated she had self control to get off meth even though it had terrible withdrawal symptoms. You being actively disingenuous like this only hurts your argument in favor of porn. >>328317 Mass shootings are cool, tell the feds, I don't give a fuck. Wubbalubbadubdub!

>>328318 >they're not using wordplay Yes, they are. >You're also ignoring how I demonstrated she >she Post tits or GTFO!!!

>>328319 I'm not posting my aunt's tits, even if they're big and juicy.

>>328297 >(57) Kill yourself commie faggot

>>328321 >Muh post count What did he mean by this?

>>328313 4chan had lots of shooters and never went down, blame cloudflare for being bitches and jimbo for being an old man who isnt hip with websites; also the shooting happened in march but 8chan died in august so you may as well blame us for being the most trolly website for all it matters

>>328322 That it correlates with stupidity.

>>328324 If using this site a lot is stupid, why are you doing it too?

>>328325 You're not helping with your premise since you didn't even counter his claim. You're still fucking stupid going by his logic.

>>328326 Yeah, but now we're stupid together, friends forever.

>>328279 <[not even remotely related] Is that really the best you can do. <[objective truth is a matter of opinion] Neat, so you're literally paid to post lies here. >>328284 >>328288 >(1) Kill yourself before we get our hands on you or you'll wish you had.