[Tombone5]

No, but IP requesting certain porn sites \approx user wants to see porn => account holder specifically requesting porn blocker be disabled. The equivalence can be expected to almost always hold, because its simply the easiest way to account for the behavior. Thus the inital objection stands.

[unprepare]

So the account holder is most likely to be responsible for ALL internet traffic on the account? That's clearly not the case

[imgabe]

There are tons and tons and tons of reasons (tons) to be against the porn filters. "The government is going to tell people I looked at porn in order to assassinate my character" is one of the most far-fetched and ridiculous ones. If the government is dead-set on assassinating your character, then first of all, you have a much more serious problem on your hands than a lack of pornography, second of all they have far more effective tools at their disposal than "Hey, so-and-so, (maybe) wanted to see a boob once".