Religion is the source of that nonsense. Help bring it down any legal way possible. Ridicule it, expose it, help people realise it's just a bunch of fairytales, most often useless and sometimes actually damaging.
There are plenty of feminists that are as militantly atheistic as they are militantly anti-pornography/prostitution/female nudity. The modern Moral Majority isn't just composed of religionists anymore.
you are right in calling out these people are a tiny portion of the population, yet here in 2024, their numbers don't seem to matter... as they have been wildly successful in moving the overton window
In summary, they are a tiny % , but by no means insignificant in terms of impact.
It's not a head poll, it's who has influence. One NYT columnist has more influence on the politics of the society than 1000 people in rural Appalachia. Influence is not distributed equally, it's very heavily skewed.
My phrasing was made in reference to the political movement largely associated with Jerry Falwell. Despite the name, the movement never lived up to either aspects of it.
There are valid social reasons for rejecting the cheap manipulation of people using addictive visual patterns that have nothing to do with religion but do relate to ethics. Even if no humans are hurt in the creation of the content, humans can be harmed by its addictive consumption.
Okay but would you want your ads on a porn site if the business was yours? That makes it seem like you approve of that behavior (e.g. drug use, gore, etc).
It makes you approve nothing, but for sure in the US it makes you a target for the vocal moralists. Leading to boycots (which might kill you), dubious free publicity (which you might feel is worth it or not), and extra regulation (which might kill you).
So, you extend the definition of a religion to "everything a lot of people support" and then declare that it needs to be "brought down". How does it work for you - you plan to ban people from agreeing on anything, and thus enshrine world peace?
