TikTok Pushes Sexual Content To Minors While Censoring Christian Games: Report
All seven accounts soon 'encountered pornographic content just a small number of clicks after setting up the account.'All seven accounts soon 'encountered pornographic content just a small number of clicks after setting up the account.'Fired cop avoids jail time after allegedly groping OnlyFans star in X-rated 'traffic stop' video while on duty
A former Tennessee police officer will avoid a jail sentence after he made a plea deal regarding an incident involving his appearance in an X-rated video.
As Blaze News reported in May 2024, the Metro Nashville Police Department was notified that one of the department's officers allegedly appeared in an OnlyFans video titled: "Can't believe he didn't arrest me."
'That was one of the most outrageous, disrespectful acts that a person here could do ...'
The video — posted on the adult-oriented subscription online platform — reportedly shows a police officer pulling a woman over. The officer's police cruiser is seen in the sexual video.
During the fake traffic stop, the cop identifies himself as "Officer Johnson."
The woman in the video allegedly pulls down her top to expose her breasts and offers that the officer may touch her.
WTVF-TV reported that the OnlyFans model offered for the "officer to grope her breasts, which he does while she is seen grabbing his crotch."
In the video, the officer appears to have a Metro Nashville Police Department patch on the shoulder of his uniform.
Investigators determined that the cop in the X-rated video was 35-year-old Sean Herman, an officer with the Metro Nashville Police Department.
Nashville police said in June 2024, "Specialized Investigations Division detectives discovered the video and identified him as the person in an MNPD uniform, seen in the video from the chest down, who took part in a mock traffic stop in an OnlyFans skit during which he groped the exposed breast of the female driver."
Investigators determined that the video was filmed in a warehouse parking lot on April 26, 2024, while Herman was "on duty as a patrol officer in the Madison Precinct."
Herman was fired from the department on May 9, 2024. He had been employed with the Metro Nashville Police Department for three years.
"That was one of the most outrageous, disrespectful acts that a person here could do, and by disrespectful, I mean to all the MNPD employees and this agency," Metro Nashville Police Department spokesperson Don Aaron told WTVF in May 2024.
In June 2024, Herman was arrested and charged with two counts of official misconduct. He was later released on a $3,000 bond.
On Thursday, Herman avoided a jail sentence by entering a "best interest" plea in Nashville criminal court for a felony count of official misconduct, according to the Associated Press.
"The best interest plea means that a defendant pleads guilty while maintaining factual innocence of the crime," according to the AP.
The second count of official misconduct was dropped, and Herman was sentenced to one year of supervised probation.
CBS News reported, "Additionally, he was granted judicial diversion, which means that certain eligible defendants who successfully finish probation under the judge's conditions will have their cases dismissed. They can also then request that charges be expunged from their record."
The AP added that a state board indefinitely suspended Herman's law enforcement officer certification, although he could petition for reinstatement following closure of the criminal case.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Why America can — and must — outlaw pornography
My daughter is 7 years old. She is adorable, kindhearted, and full of life. I would do anything to protect her.
Now think about all the 7-year-olds in your life — children, nephews, nieces, neighbor kids. Statistically speaking, 50% of them will be exposed to pornography in the next five years. Read this paragraph repeatedly until the gravity of it hits you.
Family is the building block of society, and pornography is the corrosive acid that is eating away at its foundation.
As bad as a Playboy would be, I am not talking about a magazine. I am talking about the most depraved, hard-core, and often violent sexual intercourse footage ever conceived in the human mind that is available with a few clicks to anyone with access to a smartphone or computer. The median age of first exposure to this content is 12 years old; 15% will view hard-core pornography before they graduate elementary school.
As Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier is finding out, age verification checks are doing little to deter any of this and are as easy to pass through as our border during the Biden administration.
What kind of sick society allows this?
Pornography's effects
Pornography is a corrosive acid that rots the soul; steals innocence; destroys marriages; fuels objectification, exploitation, and sex trafficking of women and children; increases rape and abuse rates; and unravels the moral fabric of society, causing great public harm. It increases anxiety, shame, sexual dysfunction, and relationship unhappiness among those who use it.
As J.C. Ryle said well, “Nothing darkens the mind so much as sin; it is the cloud which hides the face of God from us.”
Porn use affects every part of our mind, body, and soul. It inflicts immense external harms on individuals and society.
Not only does it directly warp the minds of America’s children, it affects them in indirect ways. Recent data indicates that marriages in which at least one spouse views pornography are nearly twice as likely to result in divorce, and the effects of divorce on children are staggering. Children of divorced parents often experience heightened levels of anxiety, depression, and behavioral issues.
A study by the University of Illinois Chicago indicates that divorce may lead to social withdrawal, attachment difficulties, and increased behavioral problems in children.
RELATED: Pornography is a threat to families — and to civilization
Research published in the Journal of Divorce & Remarriage found that children from divorced families are more likely to exhibit lower academic performance compared to their peers from intact families. Data from PLOS One indicates that individuals who experienced parental divorce before the age of 18 have a 61% higher risk of experiencing a stroke in adulthood. Research from Baylor University indicates that adults who experienced parental divorce during childhood have lower levels of oxytocin, a hormone associated with relationship bonding and emotional regulation.
Family is the building block of society, and pornography is the corrosive acid that is eating away at its foundation. Without any redeeming element whatsoever, pornography destroys marriages, destroys lives, and steals the innocence and protection of the young.
All of these outcomes are the result of a choice made by public officials who refuse to stand in the way of this obscene content being published.
What kind of sick society allows this?
What about the First Amendment?
Pornography is not “speech” in any meaningful, constitutionally protected sense. We rightly prohibit prostitution. Yet somehow, when the same act is filmed and distributed to millions of people over the internet, prostitution becomes exalted as “protected speech.”
This is legal nonsense of the highest order. It insults the intelligence of the American people and is a crime against children and the moral fabric of any society. To claim that the founding fathers fought and bled to secure a right to broadcast prostitution is as absurd as it is evil.
No serious person believes this legal framework is the result of honest lawmaking or faithful judicial interpretation. Rather, this perverse outcome is a product of cultural rot and late 20th-century judicial activism. Our courts were captured by ideologues more committed to preserving the sexual revolution at any cost than upholding constitutional fidelity.
But common-law tradition and Supreme Court precedent provide a clear path to prohibition.
Justice William Rehnquist, writing for the Supreme Court in Barnes v. Glen Theatre (1991), rightly noted that public nudity was a criminal offense at common law. The founders did not interpret the First Amendment as a shield for public obscenity, indecency, or exhibitionism. In fact, Miller v. California (1973) gives us the legal test we need: If material appeals to the prurient interest, depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way as defined by contemporary standards, and lacks serious political, educational, or artistic value, it is not protected by the First Amendment.
Modern pornography clearly meets all three criteria — except where legislatures have failed to define and prohibit it accordingly.
RELATED: Porn has transformed into horror
Pornography’s advocates point to Reno v. ACLU (1997), but the ruling was based on the failure of the bill in question to distinguish “obscene” from “indecent.” Moreover, the court justified its decision by claiming the internet was less invasive than radio or television.
How well does that assertion hold up 28 years later?
The internet is now the primary battleground for the soul of this generation. Because of its incorrect factual findings and clear disregard for the power clearly reserved to the states, any element of Reno and other opinions that would prohibit states and municipalities from banning public obscenity should be overturned. There are upcoming opportunities to do so. State legislatures need to provide more.
It is past time for us to recognize that publishing prostitution footage is not speech — it is an attack on human decency and the moral fabric necessary to hold families and the republic together. We must deal with it as such.
That is why I filed SB593 to abolish pornography in Oklahoma.
What SB593 does
SB593 would define “obscenity” according to the Miller test and outlaw the production, distribution, sale, and possession of obscene pornography in Oklahoma. It would re-establish the state’s authority to prosecute those who profit from the destruction of marriage, innocence, and society. It would empower law enforcement to shut down pornography rings that exploit women and children. It also increases penalties for child pornography.
The American people — many suffering the effects of a culture drowning in pornographic material — are increasingly supportive of bills like this one.
A society without pornography is better than one with it.
A 2024 YouGov poll found that support for and opposition to the total pornography ban suggested by Project 2025 were split evenly at 42-42. Among Republican voters, 60% were in support, with only 27% opposed. Republican officials can ban pornography, knowing their voters have their back by a greater than two-to-one margin.
Many object that the bill, or others like it, will be challenged in court, but that is no reason to shrink back. The goal is to pass the bill, but not merely that — it is also to force a reckoning. The Miller test provides a well-established framework to ban obscene pornography. The factual findings from Reno have been proven disastrously wrong.
Public opposition to pornography is rising. There is no better time to put this discussion before the American people and the Supreme Court.
Time to act
The left possesses no limiting principle to forcing its twisted, Marxist vision of the good on society. Leftists weaponize agencies to perform raids on political opponents, meme-makers, and pro-life protesters. They collude with social media companies to censor right-leaning opinions. They shut down businesses and churches.
Yet too many on the right still flinch at any minor deviation from utter libertinism.
A society without pornography is better than one with it. Everyone knows this, yet too many cling to unlimited, laissez-faire state approval of public prostitution footage. People have been conditioned to believe that the highest conservative principle is inaction and “neutrality.”
It is children who pay the biggest price for this folly.
Pornography exemplifies this crisis: It objectifies people made as God’s image-bearers, reducing them to commodities for gratification, thus defacing the imago Dei and alienating us from our creator. Neurologically and spiritually, it rewires the brain's reward pathways, creating addictive filters that pervert sexual perception and fracture body-soul unity, as Jesus warns in Matthew 5:28.
This echoes broader anthropological harms, fueling exploitation, addiction, and societal division that undermine human flourishing and the common good.
In legislating against it, we affirm God's design for humanity. This is not about criminalizing private lustful thoughts (a sin for the church) but addressing external actions that exploit, addict, and divide (a crime for the state). By enacting such a law, we honor God, protect the vulnerable, and fulfill our duty to promote the common good.
What kind of sick society allows pornography?
For the sake of children and the survival of the republic, pornography must be abolished.
Porn's dark empire is collapsing — here's how the fight is being won
Pornography is having a moment — and not in the way purveyors of pornography would like.
As a matter of fact, the foundations of the commercial sex industry are starting to disintegrate. Exhibit A: In a historic decision last month, the Supreme Court upheld the Texas age verification law protecting children from easily accessing harmful pornography online.
Pornography sites built their empires, in no small part, by allowing, encouraging, and profiting from the distribution of image-based sexual abuse material on their platforms.
It's proof the tide is finally turning against the pornography industry.
States are pushing back against the sexual abuse and exploitation found on pornography sites like Pornhub, XVideos, and others by passing legislative solutions like age verification, device filter legislation, and the App Store Accountability Act to curb children’s access to content that is harmful to them. Surely, with the Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of age verification, more states are likely to follow.
A Kansas mother recently filed lawsuits against four pornography sites for allegedly failing to implement age verification on their websites as required by Kansas law.
The European Union, meanwhile, is investigating Pornhub, XVideos, XNXX, and Stripchat for allegedly failing to protect children from accessing their sites in violation of the Digital Services Act.
People are waking up to the reality of pornography’s acute harm — especially to children who have had way-too-easy access to online pornography. It’s encouraging to see that government officials are taking a stand to protect children.
Online pornography is a powerful stimulus that is disruptive to children’s development and contributes to numerous harms including vulnerability to sexual victimization, child-on-child harmful sexual behaviors, high-risk sexual behaviors, and compulsive sexual behaviors. It disrupts the natural formation of children’s sexual arousal templates.
RELATED: Children win: Supreme Court slaps down Big Porn — putting kids before profit
And despite claims to the contrary, pornography is also harmful to adults.
A recent report from the Guardian revealed that pornography website algorithms take users to more extreme material, desensitizing them and spurring their escalation to child sexual abuse material and acting out what they see on real children.
The report illustrates some of the reasons pornography is harmful.
In England and Wales, 850 men a month are arrested for online child abuse offenses. They come from every walk of life: teachers, police officers, bus drivers, doctors. Those on the front line are warning of another alarming trend: a significant shift towards younger offenders among those picked up for watching illegal material. Now, police, charities, lawyers and child protection experts are asking what is driving this tidal wave of offending and finding one common thread: the explosion over the past 10 to 20 years of free-to-view and easily accessible online pornography. Material so violent it would have been considered highly extreme a generation ago is now readily available on iPads, desktops and the phones in teenagers’ pockets. A growing body of research is beginning to warn of how problematic porn habits can be a pathway into viewing images of children being abused.
Contrast this with the pornography industry’s claims that porn isn’t harmful, and it becomes ominously apparent whose side the truth is on.
Mainstream pornography sites like Pornhub have hosted child sexual abuse material, sexual assault, rape, image-based sexual abuse, nonconsensual content, and content with violent and racist themes.
Pornography sites built their empires, in no small part, by allowing, encouraging, and profiting from the distribution of image-based sexual abuse material on their platforms, according to a new report released by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation.
One woman was shocked to find out that videos of her were non-consensually uploaded to Pornhub by a former boyfriend. One of the videos had her name attached to it and garnered millions of views.
By encouraging users to upload “free” pornography, these sites get enormous traffic to their platforms that remains the basis of the industry’s profitability and incentivizes them to ignore blatant image-based sexual abuse and child sexual abuse material on their platforms.
Legislative solutions like the Take It Down Act, recently signed into law, will help those who have been victimized by the uploading of image-based sexual abuse, mandating its removal within 48 hours.
The pornography industry is on defense, as it should be. Cracks in its exploitative foundation are widening, and it’s time for the whole system of exploitation to finally crumble.
Why Prudes Are The Only Ones Consistently Having Good Sex
Human flourishing consists less of discovering who we are than of becoming who we ought to be.Majority Of Gen Z Men Want More Restrictions For Online Porn, Poll Finds
Although he was surprised by the results, Wilcox said "This study is encouraging if it leads more young men to stay away from pornography."Children win: Supreme Court slaps down Big Porn — putting kids before profit
On Friday, the Supreme Court upheld Texas’ common-sense law requiring pornography websites to verify the ages of their users and confirm that they are not children. This monumental ruling is key to protecting children from the dangers of the pornography industry. The cost of early exposure to pornography is high, and children deserve better than to be subjected to the violence and degeneracy of this industry.
In the legal world, pornography has often been characterized as a question of “free speech.” Indeed, the very name of this court case was Paxton v. Free Speech Coalition, referring to the group that challenged Texas’ law mandating age verification.
This decision reinforces the important truth that the rights of children come before the desires of adults.
But the FSC doesn't advocate for heterodox campus speakers, whistleblower protections, or even the right to supposed “hate speech.” It's a porn lobby.
Porn is big business, and its target consumers are kids. How do we know? Because in the handful of states that have passed age verification laws, some porn platforms have withdrawn altogether, preferring to lose their customers who are 18 to 88 rather than their customers who are 8 to 18.
My nonprofit Them Before Us filed an amicus brief in the Paxton case. We argued that today's pornography — free, anonymous, unlimited, violent, and degrading — is particularly dangerous to children. The Supreme Court acknowledged that threat in its ruling.
“With the rise of the smartphone and instant streaming, many adolescents can now access vast libraries of video content — both benign and obscene — at almost any time and place,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the court's opinion.
Our brief offered the justices a peek into what child or adolescent users might accidentally stumble upon if the FSC had prevailed. Hint: This isn't your uncle's Playboy.
We included a screenshot of the PornHub homepage, the most popular internet porn site. To keep with decorum, we redacted/blocked 90% of the nine video thumbnails and much of the titles as well. The content may have been too shocking for adult justices, yet it is easily accessible to a 9-year-old. To make sure there was no confusion about the “violent, body-punishing, and cruel” portals that were just a click away, we listed the popular pornographic categories on which kids could click, including babysitter, bondage, cartoon, gang bang, hentai, old/young, rough sex, school, and step fantasy.
Free speech this is not.
We don't need to wonder whether or not kids are accessing this content. A decade ago, researchers found that the average age of first exposure to pornography was between 12 and 13. That was ten years ago, before the average age of first-time cell phone users dropped to 12 years old. Many kids can and do access pornography at a much younger age, and the average middle schooler has immediate, and often secret, access to endless hours of violent and disturbing sexual content.
Those in the so-called free speech camp have long argued that protecting children from adult material is the responsibility of parents, not the porn distributors themselves. But is that realistic, effective, or even possible in today's internet landscape?
As Justice Alito openly pondered during oral arguments, “Do you know a lot of parents who are more tech-savvy than their 15-year-old?”
Filtering and parental controls rarely offer sufficient protection. In addition, children who are already socially disadvantaged, such as those raised in single-parent homes, spend more time on screens than their peers, increasing the likelihood of coming across harmful content.
Research confirms what common sense tells us: Pornography is bad for kids.
Children who are exposed to pornography before the age of 12 are significantly more likely to engage in “problem sexualized behaviors” — including attempts at imitating the sex acts they have witnessed. In addition, pornography is addictive, triggering the same kind of brain reward that leads to gambling addiction and even hard drug abuse.
And if 35-year-old, fully formed brains are being rewired by pornography, how much more so 15-year-old brains that are still developing?
No. Porn is not a “free speech” issue. It is a child protection issue. And it's not something that parents can manage themselves.
It looks like the highest court agreed. States can and should be involved in creating obstacles between children and the sexual content that we know can harm them for life.
When adults put children first, good policy results. This decision reinforces the important truth that the rights of children come before the desires of adults. This ruling not only upholds Texas’ law protecting children online but also paves the way for other states’ laws to hold the pornography industry accountable for harming children online.
Leftist Supreme Court Justices Want To Parent Your Kids In The Worst Way
Parents who want to raise their own children without government interference, are grateful leftists are still a minority on SCOTUSIn 6-3 Ruling, Supreme Court Affirms Texas’ Right To Protect Children From Online Obscenity
'Obscenity is no exception to the widespread practice of requiring proof of age to exercise age-restricted rights,' Thomas wrote.Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com