Poll: Pornography Tax

[Stryc9]

Oh, so since my grammar wasn't spot on my point is invalid?

What's funny is that you think they would actually stop taxing us after the 8 billion dollar debt that we are facing was paid off. That's just not the way it works.

Also, why is it considered dickish to want to cut off and deport people who are illegally in my country? Don't tell me that I'm racist either because I never specified any particular group, I said illegal aliens as in all of them, the white ones too.

While we're picking apart grammar and spelling:
Just be a bigger asshole to you than you were to me check your fucking grammer. "That's preety damn funny?" Like its a question whether i'm funny or not. Punctuation is key. When you put a period its a statement.

Sorry to come off sounding like a dick but when your post actually looks like it may be serious that's going to happen.

 

[Joeshie]

Who cares? I just get my porn off the net. If you are buying your porn, you are already wasting your money.

 

[Graustein]

Just be a bigger asshole to you than you were to me check your fucking grammer. "That's preety damn funny?" Like its a question whether i'm funny or not. Punctuation is key. When you put a period its a statement.

Punctuation is indeed key. That's why the personal pronoun "I" requires capitalisation, and when one uses the contraction for "it is", an apostrophe is needed. An apostrophe is not needed for the possessive. Finally, Grammar lacks an "e", pretty has two "t"s and only one "e" and Hillary has two "l"s. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law]

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Now, to stop trolling. I don't consider pornography morally wrong on any level (exploitation of women and the porno business may go hand-in-hand, but using that logic wearing Nike shoes is morally wrong). Therefore, I see no reason for it to deserve a "sin" tax. Since it is a part of life, and we all know that the only thing inevitable in life is taxes (oh, and death), it's pretty inevitable that it would be taxed. But a "sin" tax? Why not tax atheists 5% extra for not believing in the almighty Jesus Christ?

 

[Flying-Emu]

Just to clear this up, because it seems to be every fifth post...

-This tax is not in regards to, nor will it affect Internet porn.

And as to all the "Who Buys Porn when the Net is free" crowd:

Pornographic video and magazine sales are still a thriving business, but consider that the term is loose enough they can apply it to Maxim magazine if they wished, or any number of other mags. This is something that will impact you or someone you know, if not now, then soon. It starts with one end of the spectrum, and slowly but surely, it will travel to the other end unless stopped. Today Hustler, tomorrow Maxim, Friday we loose Victoria Secret and the underwear section in the Sears catalog, and by the weekend, they've taxed anything that shows more skin than a muslim headwrap/Hajib/burkah (sp?).

Thank you, Khell_Sennet. Now if people would read it, maybe this conversation could advance.

Anyway.

Who cares? I just get my porn off the net. If you are buying your porn, you are already wasting your money.

Read above.

Also, it applies to PARAPHERNELIA as well, which means toys, oils, etc. So if you enjoy anything besides standard, non-assisted sexual intercourse, you WILL be hit by this tax. Everyone read this post, please. I'm sick of seeing the same argument over and over again.

 

[Graustein]

Also, it applies to PARAPHERNELIA as well, which means toys, oils, etc. So if you enjoy anything besides standard, non-assisted sexual intercourse, you WILL be hit by this tax. Everyone read this post, please. I'm sick of seeing the same argument over and over again.

Question: Does it apply to condoms and other contraceptives?
If so, it will most definitely impact almost everyone above a certain age, and a good number of individuals below it (no, that number is not the age of consent).
Question the second: Does your poll refer to the "sin" tax of pornography or the fact that pornography as a whole is actually taxed? If the former, I'm against it. If the latter, I'm all for it, as it's an industry like any other, and a bloody big one to boot.

 

[CoziestPigeon]

Need a new choice : lulz-y

 

[Flying-Emu]

Also, it applies to PARAPHERNELIA as well, which means toys, oils, etc. So if you enjoy anything besides standard, non-assisted sexual intercourse, you WILL be hit by this tax. Everyone read this post, please. I'm sick of seeing the same argument over and over again.

Question: Does it apply to condoms and other contraceptives?
If so, it will most definitely impact almost everyone above a certain age, and a good number of individuals below it (no, that number is not the age of consent).
Question the second: Does your poll refer to the "sin" tax of pornography or the fact that pornography as a whole is actually taxed? If the former, I'm against it. If the latter, I'm all for it, as it's an industry like any other, and a bloody big one to boot.

No, not condoms or contraceptives. Only things that are used to aid in or enhance sexual satisfaction.

*EDIT*

Need a new choice : lulz-y

No, it really doesn't. This is a serious topic that people should be legitimately worried about.

 

[Alpha001]

Gentleman! Load your harddrives! Tonight, we fap to freedom!

 

[DeleteMe1112311]

and this is why we have the other 90% of the internet.

 

[Flying-Emu]

Gentleman! Load your harddrives! Tonight, we fap to freedom!

I lol'd.

and this is why we have the other 90% of the internet.

Read upwards and realize why the hell that only answers half the question!

 

[Graustein]

Also, it applies to PARAPHERNELIA as well, which means toys, oils, etc. So if you enjoy anything besides standard, non-assisted sexual intercourse, you WILL be hit by this tax. Everyone read this post, please. I'm sick of seeing the same argument over and over again.

Question: Does it apply to condoms and other contraceptives?
If so, it will most definitely impact almost everyone above a certain age, and a good number of individuals below it (no, that number is not the age of consent).
Question the second: Does your poll refer to the "sin" tax of pornography or the fact that pornography as a whole is actually taxed? If the former, I'm against it. If the latter, I'm all for it, as it's an industry like any other, and a bloody big one to boot.

No, not condoms or contraceptives. Only things that are used to aid in or enhance sexual satisfaction.

What about ribbed or flavoured condoms and the like, though?
I'm only half joking - those could quite easily fall under the "aid in or enhance sexual satisfaction" criterion.

 

[Flying-Emu]

Also, it applies to PARAPHERNELIA as well, which means toys, oils, etc. So if you enjoy anything besides standard, non-assisted sexual intercourse, you WILL be hit by this tax. Everyone read this post, please. I'm sick of seeing the same argument over and over again.

Question: Does it apply to condoms and other contraceptives?
If so, it will most definitely impact almost everyone above a certain age, and a good number of individuals below it (no, that number is not the age of consent).
Question the second: Does your poll refer to the "sin" tax of pornography or the fact that pornography as a whole is actually taxed? If the former, I'm against it. If the latter, I'm all for it, as it's an industry like any other, and a bloody big one to boot.

No, not condoms or contraceptives. Only things that are used to aid in or enhance sexual satisfaction.

What about ribbed or flavoured condoms and the like, though?
I'm only half joking - those could quite easily fall under the "aid in or enhance sexual satisfaction" criterion.

I'm not sure. I think it's against Washington legislation to interfere with contraceptives.

Besides those morning-after pills, because that gets into that ugly abortion argument.

 

[DeleteMe1112311]

Gentleman! Load your harddrives! Tonight, we fap to freedom!

I lol'd.

and this is why we have the other 90% of the internet.

Read upwards and realize why the hell that only answers half the question!

Oh I realize it may not answer the whole question, but this is really my only thought on the subject -- I don't care to linger on this topic for some reason....problably because I have a lot of internet searching to do now.

 

[Stryc9]

At the moment as long as you don't live in Washington State you have nothing to worry about. Those of us that do however are hoping this bill doesn't pass into law.

Also thanks to Flying Emu for pointing out that it applies to things like massage oil as that was somewhat of a concern, now I know to stock up just in case. At $10 a bottle that's another $1.90 in tax the pseudo-governor wants from me on top of 8% sales tax.

It's not my fault I voted for Rossi.

EDIT: Also, a way around this would be to start a Church of Pornography, just get 400,000+ residents in the state to agree to claim membership of this Church, come up with the basic tenants of the Church and apply for tax exempt status declaring all pornographic material and as the good senator put it 'paraphernalia' as sacraments, then it can't be taxed unless they're going to tax bibles and those little cross necklaces and other religious items.

 

[Stryc9]

UPDATE: This discussion is now pointless, the bill died in the state senate yesterday, from the sound of it without ever even really coming up for discussion.