porn to be made illegal

We haaaveee a responssseee!Okay, I will rebut, your rebut? Lot's of butts around here, reminding me of porn really. "Some websites require age confirmation but people aren't afraid to lie"Mkay, but is against the law. A lot of websites require you to use your credit card as age confirmation... Is this an anecdotal? Maybe, maybe not... Don't judge me!"there is no way of the sites to find out if viewers are honest about their age. "An aforementioned credit card verification..."Some parents may be unsure how to use the software or device settings to prevent them accessing the sites."This is an appeal to extremes fallacy. Many computers come with the option. There is nothing stopping them with getting a friend, or asking for the computer to come pre-installed with the software. Point is, they don't need to do it themselves." Yes it is illegal to view under 18 however without checks which can prove an actual age many people get away with underage viewing"But there are checks. When it asks you if you are over 18, you are 'pinky swearing' almost, that you are above the legal age. If you are found to be lying, you can be reprehensible for it."Young people may be able to get hold of alcohol however there are ID checks on sales of alcohol."Don't be inconsistent please. You just attempted to invalidate my argument on the basis that people could bypass the legal system. As with alcohol, there is an age limit, which requires a proof of age, but we all have heard of a fake ID. Again this is still an appeal to extremes, so the proposition should have never been proposed in the first place..."By law it is legal to drink in a private area once you are 5." Ok, thanks for the new fact, good buddy ol' pal. It is true, you learn somthing new everyday. However, I don't see how this refutes anything..." Technically if somebody under 18 gets hold of alcohol and drinks it at home it is legal"But actually obtaining the alcohol is illegal. It actually says in your source "For an adult to buy or attempt to buy alcohol on behalf of someone under 18. (retailers can reserve the right to refuse the sale of alcohol to an adult if they’re accompanied by a child and think the alcohol is being bought for the child.)" So it is actually illegal to buy alcohol for your child. I will give you that, I suppose. However, the point about the consumption of alcohol of the 5 year old, it is very vague, and does not mention the actual limit that the child is allowed to consume. But, I do not see how this refutes anything, I believe this is a red herring..." It would be illegal to be sold the alcohol but then it would be the shop keeper that is breaking the law."Not if the person had a fake ID, then the shop keeper would be legally obligated to sell you the alcohol; it is only illegal when the shop keeper would ignore an age verification and sell you it regardless..."it would be illegal but there's no actual checks to confirm this, just the hope people will be honest."You say this in the context of the parental software... It have a similar effect as the 'blocked webistes' at school. I assume you are from a generation that is abundant with techonology, I assume you are familiar with the convention. There is no honesty involved, the children are denied access to the web address."Some parent may trust their children won't view explicit content "Another appeal to extremes fallacy. The contention is that there are steps already in effect that try to mitigate the crime from occurring. This does not prove that it should be banned; Pro should be arguing that there should be more restrictions implemented to further reduce the amount of underage viewings. People can still purchase alcohol illegally, should alcohol be banned? "and with the option to clear web history they can't exactly check."Whenever you vist a site, your IP gets permanently recorded, there is no escaping. Nevertheless, the parental system could negate this from ever happening..."The only option would be to use the software which like I've said may not be known of or if it is they may not understand how to use it."The same logic could be said to fix a car... The person who needs their car fixed might not know how to fix it. From Pro's logic, this hypothetical person would never be able to fix their car. However, if there is more advertisement for this, they could easily get a technician, a friend or something like that in to apply it for them... As could the person easily get an engineer to fix their car.""Young people think that it is normal to watch it as their friends or older siblings have, but it isn't cool at all. It can cause all sorts of long term issues."Sorry, you have provided no solitary evidence for this assertion... Although, if it were valid, the same could be applied to alcohol."My reasoning for making porn illegal is that there is no checks on underage viewing and the issues porn causes in the long term."Well, Pro effectively concedes here. First, you need to provide evidence that absolutely no porn website/material have no way of stopping children from viewing it... Since you can't, the debate is actually over. Awww. This debate ended a bit 'prematurely' if you get what I am saying? Ok, i will stop with the porn puns. I am sorry, "I can't stop"... <------ Ok last porn pun, I PROMISE. "Not many porn stars are natural. May I just add there are teen porn videos which are uploaded. This is illegal."You have to be above eighteen to actually appear in a porno/shoot porn. So no, not all teen porn videos are illegal. Only the ones that are younger than eighteen - which is CP (Child Porn) and you can get into some really deep kleenex if you view or upload it. Sorry for another porn pun."By this I mean that to people these porn stars are a fantasy, they fantasise over these people but probably will Never meet someone who matches these people. I have asked a few people how they see these porn stars , reality or fantasy? They said fantasy."An anecdotal fallacy. And provides no tangible logic or stats to prove this... "I have just done some research, here are some websites which back up my points" These do not directly back up your assertions. You have just listed some downsides to porn. There are downsides to alcohol, cigarettes etc. But free choice is there for a reason. As I have mentioned earlier people might find that the positives actually outweigh the negatives - this is a dropped argument, for you have left it uncontested. If we spread more awareness about the problems, it would reduce ignorance when approaching porn. People who might feel that the negatives outweigh the postives, could make a rational decision to whether they would like to view it or not. An entire ban would not rectify it."my points are based on the statement I raised "porn to be illegal" . I don't see how the points I have raised suggest cars & planes should be banned- please explain ."I thought I had explained thouroughly earlier, but nevertheless, I will extend: it's an analogy... I used your same logic (premises and conclusion) to anything else that matches the criteria, to depict its fallaciousness... Your premise and conclusion is, if it can hurt people, it should be banned. The variable that people could access porn more easily than alcohol should be negated, for people can still get injured off of purchasing alcohol illegally."Alcohol is slightly different from porn as alcohol has much stricter ruling, it is harder to get hold of alcohol than access porn." Not to sound rude our anything, but you only opine that it is - provide no sound evidence for this."If porn isn't made illegal access should be made very restricted."Pro nullifies her own resolution and her own stance. She says that the problems could be rectified without a ban, therefore she has provided no real evidence for why a ban should happen."If porn sites are removed then people won't be able to access it online, nothing can be done about any downloaded pornography however if sites are removed and magazines stop being produced issues can begin to get fixed."So she concedes that it would be very ineffective. There is nothing stopping the already existing videos from being duplicated and sent to friends, and material from being copied and passed on. I argue that this is not an appeal to extreams fallacy, because it is logical to deduce that there are many porn addicts around (^ as Pro mentioned in one of her sources) would logically do anything necessary to view porn again - the problems would continue, and the people who find that the pros outweigh the cons would suffer. Well, Pro has already admitted that a ban isn't necessary, therefore the debate is already over - she made her BoP impossible to achieve. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted <--------------- my bad, I couldn't help myself.Don't worry, round one and two is only forepla... I should really stop myself before the argument gets flagged lol. Anyways, over to you, Pro! Please don't flag my argument!