Posted on 07/14/2004 7:46:19 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
So you decline to dispute the lack of intellectual honesty in that comparison. Thanks.
The method of distribution/sale has everything to do with the content of what is being sold. At one end, softcore (Playboy-type) is sold just about everywhere; at the other end, extreme hardcore is available at adult bookstores/mail order. Kiddie porn is underground.
What am I telling you that you don't know? What is the point of your question -- would you please make one? I'm getting just a little frustrated here with your feigned ignorance (I hope it's feigned).
I've explained myself in my post#693. Sorry if you refuse to see my point.
So you refuse to see the parallels? Thanks.
see Age of Consent
but regardless...my point is that the age can be lowered. And if it can...it will. Which brings us back to kiddie porn. What is illegal today will be legal tomorrow.
Something on point I posted before that I thought you like to see:
I recently heard a wise pastor say that pornography teaches young men to think of women as creatures with female bodies and male brains -- "always hot and ready"...
As a result, when these porn-trained young men get married, they think they "got a dud" wife because she cooks slowly, like a crockpot, rather than comes on instantly, like a microwave. Even more unexpected, she connects sex to other concerns, like physical and financial security, a pleasant home, etc.
These young men need to wake up, repent of their porn and the lies it teaches, and replace their warped view with a biblical understanding:
"Let your fountain be blessed, and rejoice in the wife of your youth, a lovely deer, a graceful doe. Let her breasts fill you at all times with delight; be intoxicated always in her love. [Proverbs 5:18-19]
I remember the 60s generation told us to shut up and let them "Do Their Own Thing". Well, they did their own thing alright. The tax payers ended up having to pay for their overdose treatments, psychiatric treatment and rehabs. We had to pay for the care of their neglected children, and even paid the children's social security benefits when the drug addicts died.
I see such selfish attitudes in the last 6 months. Illegal Immigration is destroying this country, but because the Republicans are in power it is OK. Nobody cares about the fact that we are being robbed by the politicians to pay for the care of illegals. In essence, our politicians are using our money in order to buy votes from those who would destroy our lives here. People don't care that out West our citizens are living in hell - lives being destroyed by the immigrants moving in and taking over.
Yeah, do your own thing, but remember when your lives are destroyed by your selfishness, I'll come along with my hard earned tax money and pay the bills that result from your so called freedoms.
That's a keeper.
Legalizing a drug will not make gang violence go away.
Legalizing alcohol only moved the gangs into drugs.
Legalizing marijuana will not make the gang violence go away. They'll continue to deal hard drugs.
Legalize all recreational drugs and the gangs will deal prescription drugs, export drugs, and sell to minors. Violence remains.
591 bumpkinbobpaulsen
______________________________________
Bob advocates total prohibition of ALL mind altering substances.
And is too dense to realize how his position violates our Constitutional principles.
-tpaine-
______________________________________
Robert_Paulson2 wrote:
The problem tpaine, is that we as a nation are SO far down the proverbial "slippery slope" of obsessive nannystatism, that the common folks pretty much expect big brother to restrict, legislate, tax, regulate, outlaw, prosecute or otherwise inject the federal gun barrell into every aspect of EVERY personal freedom.
_____________________________________
And then there are the uncommon people, zealots like paulsen, who actively want big brother State to restrict, legislate, tax, regulate, outlaw, prosecute into every aspect of our personal freedoms.
I am still waiting for you to show how opening additional methods of LEGAL distribution of porn will lead to an increase in ILLEGAL child porn.
No I don't see any parallels between a current legal activity and a current illegal activity. Nor do I see any between an activity between consenting adults and an activity that causes harm to a non consentor.
Maybe there are parallels in bizarro world, but I just don't see them.
What difference does it make whether something's currently legal or not? The issue is over whether a certain activity should be legal or illegal. Or do you advocate freezing all the laws in place for all time, just because?
If and when The Gay Love Tunnel reaches the shelves previously occupied by Playboy, I am expecting to see a increase in the production and availability of kiddie porn. And, as I said twice before, I expect it to start with 16 and 17-year-olds (not really kiddie porn, right?).
Hey, that's my opinion based on past history. You disagree and say it won't happen. Actually, I suppose you have to believe that, don't you?
There are those. Indeed.
Current schmurrent.
I proposed that we make stealing from CSM legal. Feel free to filter block our activities, if you can. You're allowed.
"Nor do I see any between an activity between consenting adults and an activity that causes harm to a non consentor."
That's because you refuse to see or even acknowledge indirect harm.
I don't know why you would want to live this way. I mean, there's still no guarantees when we have laws against stealing from CSM. But you want to make it easy on the criminals because, by golly, criminals have rights too!
If you made stealing legal, then the theives wouldn't be criminals. That is where you fail to draw the parallels. You are trying to make criminals into law abiding citizens by relaxing a current law that causes harm to an actual victim and comparing that to creating a law to turn a law abiding citizen into a criminal.
"Indirect victim" - harm to society, not measurable as a direct effect of a certain behaviour, but used as a tool of the socialist. The individual must be sacrificed for the good of society.
BTW, it is already legal to steal from CSM. The government does it every 2 weeks and they steal about 30% of my earnings. Instead of doing it directly, society has chosen to use government force to take care of that task. I consider that an evil use of government force too.
Yes. The question is, exactly how will we "deal with you."
No, the argument is what should be the basis of making something illegal. Should it be based on morals? Whose morals should be used? Or would it be better to allow consenting adults to decide how to live their lives?
What good is legislated morality? If you want to base this on religion, then why would you want to use the government to destroy the free will given to us by God? Shouldn't we chose our own reward?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.