Predators & Pornography. A disturbing link.

NRO ^ | May 19, 2005, 8:15 a.m. | By Penny Nance

[frogjerk]

OK, just to be clear we are not advocating banning porn. Porn should be safe legal and available

Replace the word porn with abortion and you get the classic leftist argument.

[MarkL]

>>>>I like porn. I have NEVER, nor would I EVER, become a sexual predator. Period.

Thus no one else would either...hmm...

I guess if one person isn't allergic to bee stings, no one else could possibly be allergic either.

Fact: The vast majority of "users" of porn are neither sexual addicts nor sexual predators. How can I possibly say that this is a fact? Given the amount of money spent on porn every year, that would indicate that about 1/3 of the population of the US is addicted to porn (can't be, since most people still manage to get to work every day), or are sexual predators. Do you really want to keep something out of the hands of the vast majority who "use it responsibly," simply because there are some sociopaths who might come into contact with it and be "sent over the edge?" (this is something about which I'm NOT convinced, the role of porn and causality).

Congratulations on being the Brady Campaign Poster Boy for 2005.

Is prior restraint really the solution that you're looking for? After all, how many murders might not have happened if the gun wasn't there? And how many other things can we relate to this argument?

Mark

[AppyPappy]

just to be clear we are not advocating banning porn

I'm not. Just make the manufacturers and distributors liable for their product, that's all.

[bird4four4]

I like to think I share my wifes alcohol addiction, not the other way around.

[Dead Corpse]

I thought we were having a discussion?

Really? I thought a bunch of you were just piling on to get your favorite cause de jure banned? For liberals, its gun. For neo-cons, it's anything to do with sex. You both use the same logic, although you both also refuse to see it.

And arguing with hardliners in either camp is also completely pointless. As I should have known better.

[frogjerk]

Fact: The vast majority of "users" of porn are neither sexual addicts nor sexual predators. How can I possibly say that this is a fact? Given the amount of money spent on porn every year, that would indicate that about 1/3 of the population of the US is addicted to porn (can't be, since most people still manage to get to work every day), or are sexual predators.

I guess there is no such thing as a functional addict.

[bird4four4]

Make gun manufacturers liable for their product? Or Car manufacturers. Ludicrous. Why is it OK for porn?

[MarkL]

Porn is the most sacred institution in the First Amendment

Well, the SCOTUS, the congresscritters, and President Bush all seem to like it better than political speech, given the popularity and success of McCain/Feingold CFR!

Mark

[Dead Corpse]

You have attacked the most sacred of rights.

Ah yes. Because America is the Land of the Free, accept if you like porn in which case you are a criminal that must be persecuted at every turn for having naughty thoughts.

Nice going ace.

[bird4four4]

You caught that, good. Difference is one is murder, the other is not.

[AppyPappy]

The vast majority of "users" of porn are neither sexual addicts nor sexual predators

Fact: The vast majority of people who see a Geico commercial do not buy Geico. So why does Geico advertise?

[trebb]

The existence of porn as "art" has nothing to do with it - it's the existence of those who create it and those who obsess on it because of deep emotional and spiritual sickness. If it wasn't readily available, the sickos would find some avenue to make it.

Ergo - it's existence doesn't cause folks to do evil deeds, it's the existence of those who would do evil deeds that proliferates it.

or sumpin like dat.

[Conservatrix]

Did the Michael Jackson jury see this article?

[Antoninus]

Ah. So I'm sexually disfunctional now. Nice of you to be able to judge me so quickly.

Not judging, friend. Your extreme negative reaction to critcism of pornography is troubling, though. Almost sounds like the reactions I've heard from people when I critcize their use of drugs...

I should have known better than to have this argument here. The more things around here change, the more things stay the same.

Yep, you should have.

Also, the wife knows. Has enjoyed it on occassion. Neither of us is "addicted", except maybe to each other. Ect... Not that it is any of your damn business.

You're right, it's not. It's also not my business that you feel free to broadcast your "liking" of porn on a public internet forum, but that didn't stop you, did it?

[frogjerk]

Really? I thought a bunch of you were just piling on to get your favorite cause de jure banned? For liberals, its gun. For neo-cons, it's anything to do with sex. You both use the same logic, although you both also refuse to see it.

I am not a libertarian. I do not believe anything goes in a free society so do not force your views upon the rest of us.

[AppyPappy]

Make gun manufacturers liable for their product? Or Car manufacturers.

Already true.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Are you married? If so, what does your wife have to say about your "hobby"?

Probably about the same as football Sunday or a golfing vacation.
Are you saying that if women don't like it, that men must give it up and ban it?

[frogjerk]

Make gun manufacturers liable for their product? Or Car manufacturers. Ludicrous. Why is it OK for porn?

A gun is not immoral in itself, neither is a car, but, porn is by its very nature immoral.

[Dead Corpse]

I am not a libertarian.

Obviously. You should have just said, "I don't believe in a free society" and left it at that.

[Conservatrix]

I like porn.

No wonder your screename is Dead Corpse.