Posted on 03/21/2007 9:14:58 AM PDT by Frank Sheed
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
I noticed that. Why switch the topic? Everyone agrees that child porn should be illegal. Not everyone agrees what constitutes general porn and what the law should be about it.
Not necessarily.
Yes, it is largely subjective. However, I believe there are some things that most every reasonable person would deem obscene.
I chose what I post. But since you asked, not all porn is child porn - that is so obvious it doesn't need to be stated. But all child porn is porn - the worst part of porn along with snuff and torture films. You apparently are confused. Take it easy.
Obviously you have not followed the news. No, not everyone is opposed to child porn. There is ACLU, not to mention all the pedophiles and others demanding it. Some judges have gone easy on offenders, sending the message that it is no big deal.
Ofcourse there are those. It wasn't an all inclusive "everyone". Certainly everyone on the FR.
Defining what is porn and what isn't is impossible. There are blue haired old Baptist ladies that consider a picture of a woman wearing shorts to be porn. Many many of said women would consider many of the pictures posted on FR to be porn. Do we respect their opinion and define it there? Certainly not!
Since when do "we" as the Republican party, or "conservative" movement, regard child rearing as a government responsibility?
Secondly, your effort to connect slavery to porn sorta fell on deaf ears, if you know what i mean.
I suggest you return to your vast hyperbole collection, and try something else. It ain't workin..........
That's what the forum is for. Responding about my seniority is a pretty lame form of response right there with criticising spelling. That makes me think you have more recently joined the planet than I had first thought.
I never equated slavery with porn. Stop misrepresenting my words. Your silly attempts at being cute in your words "ain't working." Read your own statement to see how ridiculous you sound. <
Discuss the issues all you want, but do NOT make it personal.
I’m no social scientist, and I don’t pretend to believe what John Q. Citizen thinks about this, but I’ve lived in prison for a long time now, and I’ve met a lot of men who were motivated to commit violence. Without exception, every one of them was deeply involved in pornography - deeply consumed by the addiction. The F.B.I.’s own study on serial homicide shows that the most common interest among serial killers is pornographers.
Are you suggesting, or is that person suggesting that porn turns people into serial killers?
I don't know of anyone who would disagree with that statement. Now the question is how to keep it from simply turning from a debate on what is or isn't obscene to one about who is or isn't "reasonable".
I'm not confused. I understand you.
I know from personal experience that porn can create and fuel violent tendecies in users.
The FBI knows as well. Researchers know as well. Ted Bundy experienced it himself, and his numerous victims know the truth all too well.
It's a fact, but one society wants to ignore in it's hedonistic heyday.
Garbage!
The porn label is based on emotional reactions to visual or verbal stimuli, which is in the entertainment arena, and as old as time.
Less than thirty years ago, showing a woman sharing a bed with a man, or selling underwear with live models would have considered blasphemy and banned.
Americans are the most sexually prudish people on the planet, and there are repercussions for this state of mind. Most countries that have had a more sexually free social structure during the past fifty years do not have the incidences of extreme sexual perversion exhibited by child molesters that we currently have. Did you ever question why this is? What are the underlying causes of this horrible crime? Why so many are now resulting in murder cases?
I see a direct relationship with the health of the sexual psychology of the society, and so little is written about this. The knee jerk reaction is to incarcerate the offender and throw away the key! This is not ever going to control the defect or the numbers of men and some women who have disorders of this magnitude.
I have no objection to rational limits on any social behavior, like guns, alcohol, drugs, or sex, but when you move the controls into the authoritarian category where prohibitions and punishments are meted out as a answer to the social ills, the exact opposite results almost always occur.
Some common sense and objectivity is needed in this area, and all this hyperbole and rash action is not going to help and will only repress and then amplify the problems.
What may be a bad influence to you, may well be a healthy curiosity and normal human activity to me. But this is not because I was taught this during my upbringing. It is because I have studied human behavior and sociology. I don't create demons where no demons exist and I don't judge you either.
If you want to discuss porn, you need to understand it and it's origins, and how other societies deal with human behavior.
What many anti-porn advocates do, is out of ignorance, IMO. To me, they appear to be blinded by fear and hyperbole, much as the Muslim societies where simple exposure of a body part can lead to stoning and death.
To me, this is the problem and not the solution to what is essentially a God given human condition. He made sex enjoyable to the Nth degree for a reason. He gave us imaginations to improve on it and take it to new levels, and people with do this without any outside help or stimulus.
Trying to ban any of this essentially normal behavior will cause great social deviancy from norms and it has done exactly this, in the U.S..
Sensible and rational limits however, are indeed necessary and prudent for any human behavior and most people welcome it..
I hope I have given you something to think about.
That is a concern. However, most discretionary criteria in American law revolves around the "average, reasonable American, applying x standard"
As much as I hate to say it, it's going to be unavoidable. We can try to minimize it by taking a moderate approach, but does that really solve the problem in the end?
Did someone steal her robe?
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.