Hacker News Reader

Our system is setup so that the government - even elected via a democratic process - can't trample over certain rights.

I think this law is a dumb idea, but I'm at a loss to think of which rights this law is "trampling" over.

The right to privacy, particularly when it comes to sex or your own body.

No-one is invading your privacy here. If you choose to hand your personal details over to a pornographer, that's on you.

You don't have to watch online porn. If you do, any impact to privacy is your own fault.

Would you feel this way if it were church attendance instead of porn?

Why would churches be required to record the personal details of everyone who attends?

Why would porn sites?

Is that a trick question? We're discussing this on a post about a law that requires ID to be provided to online pornography sites to verify age.

I'm asking whether you only apply this logic to things you disapprove of.

If I was religious and a churchgoer, and the church had a good reason to check my ID upon entry and record attendance, then yes I'd probably accept it as a condition of attending.

Though I can't imagine what rationale there would be to start requiring churches to do this.

For example, to protect impressionable children from exposure to it. Same as the stated rationale for the porn law.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com