Porno Condoms

Why the fuck am I being asked to vote on whether some porn star uses a condom? (California Prop 60).

WTF is this? Why is this any of my goddamn business whether porn stars use a goddamn condom or not? Why in the fuck would I want state funding allocated for some guy to watch porn all day to make sure every porn star is wearing a condom? Why would I want to drive the porn industry out of state by needlessly regulating them? Why not a Jew tax?

How does this happen? How does shit like this make it on the ballot?

It's to encourage the kids to wear condoms, they don't want porn to be a bad influence.
I'm pretty sure politicians are all autists that don't understand how people think.

>Officiating degeneracy
>Paying for more bureaucracy
>Stifling local industry
The absolute most Blue state thing I've ever heard

All the pornstars on Twitter are against it.

Remy LaCroix's asshole is against it.

more government bullshit

if you want to stop teenage pregnancy then l2n 2 raise kids

That sums it up pretty damn well.

arent all porn stars already required to undergo regular STD tests?

this is pointless and actually hurts the female performers in some situations

"Performers"

I thought it was already a thing.

Vote no on this. Also vote no on both plastic bag bullshit, and the ammo thing, vote no on that one for sure.

I voted against the death penalty because its more expensive to execute than just have them serve life and that gives the innocent their whole lives to prove they are innocent.

Also voted to legalize weed because fuck the feds.

it is a fucking performance for all involved

its as far from real sex you can get, just constant soulless pounding for hours to get the right shot

having a condom on causes pain in those situations

fucking twists suck ass. They're too thick and it doesn't add any sensation for either party. Feels like damn plastic wrap.

Vote yes. Degeneracy will leave your area.

The women and the producers constantly say that it's all quite real. Yes, they could be lying for PR, but I highly doubt it's all a performance.

It's all degeneracy. I see no problem with driving porn out of a place, the problem is that when you start the snowball of regulation rolling, eventually it turns into an avalanche and consumes everybody.

>its more expensive to execute than just have them serve life

You idiot.

In 5 years they'll be pushing for mandatory STD tests for preschoolers to make sure little Janie doesn't have a case of the clap after she's been diddled during a "consensual relationship"

60 Y This is a hard one. It is a bullshit law. It is wrong to impose this restriction on businesses and workers. However, we don't want the porn industry in California, especially near Hollywood. Most porn would move out of state meaning less Californians would be caught up in it. More importantly, porn would have less of an influence on Hollywood. This is one where it is better to swallow your principles and vote pragmatically. The ends justify the means in this case.

The people who put that on the ballot are from AIDS Education groups. They spent literally millions to get it on the ballot.

Vote no.

It is though.

Politicans had nothing to do with the proposition, you fucking retard.

>How does this happen?
Greed and power seeking from the propositions writer.

> How does shit like this make it on the ballot?
People recognize porn is bad. They know it is freedom of speech. They look for ways to limit its reach and appeal.

lol, did see anything like that on our voting machines.
They asked about some levy for a school, but that was legit and not retarded.

Vote no so they all get aids as a punishment for their degenerate life style.

>All the pornstars on Twitter are against it.
Which pornstars aren't on Twitter that are a part of the major sites and from america

Here is a complete breakdown:

Propositions

51 N Pork for government administrators.

52 N When in doubt, vote against burdens on businesses

53 Y The legislature almost always fucks things up.

54 Y Minor cost to increase governmental transparency.

55 N If we can't fund education through the general fund then there are major problems that need to be fixed.

56 N Vote against taxes.

57 N Dangerous criminals shouldn't be let out early.

58 N English only education has been fantastic for hispanic school children. A no vote is humanitarian. White Nationalists might argue that giving the liberal idiots what they want would be better for dumb whites (less job competition in the future). No matter where you stand on that issue, having more pockets of basically a foreign country in California isn't a good thing. It also will hurt English only speaking small business owners in the future.

59 N Your free speech is important. Protect it.

60 Y This is a hard one. It is a bullshit law. It is wrong to impose this restriction on businesses and workers. However, we don't want the porn industry in California, especially near Hollywood. Most porn would move out of state meaning less Californians would be caught up in it. More importantly, porn would have less of an influence on Hollywood. This is one where it is better to swallow your principles and vote pragmatically. The ends justify the means in this case.

61 N From an economic perspective, this is a very questionable strategy. It is made to sound good to dumb people. It might not save any money. There are certainly better negotiation strategies.

62 N Kill them.

63 N Easiest proposition on the ballot.

64 N No need for this.

65 N Dumb.

66 Y Kill them faster.

67 N Dumb.

Kek, cali hasn't figured the porn industry left to Miami years ago because of their BS laws? It amazes me people think creating so many restrictions on an industry that provides a lot of tax revenue won't leave.

Sorry Schlomo! I'm voting yes on 60, go fuck yourself

Better than calling them "actresses"

The trial to execute someone costs more on average than to sentence them to life. Ethically I'm for the death penalty but financially its a nightmare

Is it gay to suck a dick if it's wearing a condom? You aren't technically touching the penis


Asking for a friend

That is the entire point. That is where most of the pro-60 support comes from. It isn't worth having the industry in California.

Which is why you vote YES on 66. We have the option to make it cost less and take less time.

Getting them to leave is the purpose you Jew

VOTE YES YOU IDIOT
Destroy that jewish industry

She does have the most lickable one

It seems like a good idea.

How will it cut costs because most of the costs is the trial proving they did it

If the trial is most of the cost, then what difference does the sentencing make? You have to pay for a trial no matter if you have the death penalty or not.

It saves money because it limits the appeal process. The big money saver there is of course speeding up the execution process tremendously.

>Literally name your largest condom magnum

what's the point?

>The big money saver there is of course speeding up the execution process tremendously.
That's what I wanted to hear. I'm not in Cali but I support it

Durex large are bigger but nothing beats theyfit

>mfw voting yes to spite the jewish porn producers and the vampires in sacramento who leech off the taxes they pay

Seeing people in porn wearing condoms is only going to encourage a small number couples with aspergers. It would only take one time emulating their favorite rubber wearing porn star to find out how much condoms kill the feeling.

Agreed. That's why I voted no. Porn stars should care enough about their health and safety to worry about this shit themselves. It doesn't require the government or another sales tax increase to do it.

It's the fags and fag enablers who run California who are responsible for this mess. Most of the highest paid women in the industry are refusing to work with any man who has done gay porn or who is rumored to have had homosexual relationships in the past unless they use a condom.

The fucking queers are upset because it's unfair that they are being singled out and running to their elected stool pushing representatives to pass a law that if they have to wear a condom then everyone has to.

I base this conclusion on absolutely nothing.

I believe you

>the problem is that when you start the snowball of regulation rolling, eventually it turns into an avalanche and consumes everybody.


>Hello?
>Yes, my wife and I would like to have sex tonight
>Can you send a Condom Inspector to Cuckold Avenue 69 at 9pm?
>Heh, you guys sure are busy! Well, I guess we'll have to make it 5pm then
>Hello Mr. Inspector! As you can see I already put it on and I also filled out all the neccessary forms
>Non-regulation?
>Well, sure you can test it on my wife
>Thank you and have a nice evening si-
>"...make sure it stays on for the entirety of the sexual intercourse"?
>I understand, just have a seat.