This thesis addresses three tropes utilized by anti-porn advocates in both the first porn wars (1970s-1980s) and the second porn wars (2000s-present) while also integrating the use of moral panics to strengthen the anti-porn stance, 1) protect the vulnerable (i.e., women and children), 2) the fable of choice and morality, and 3) the use of scientific and medicalized language as a weapon through societal consequences and porn addiction. This thesis rhetorically analyzes and historically centers anti-porn advocates in their work in censuring pornography. I also highlight two popular anti-porn advocates; Catharine MacKinnon from the first porn wars and Gail Dines from the second porn wars. Through this research and tracing of moral panics and the tropes, I challenge the notion of progress in pro-porn advocacy in the hopes of changing the tactics in the second porn wars to show genuine progress in the current political climate in the United States.