To: Dante3
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!
146 posted on
03/22/2007 7:07:15 AM PDT by
DungeonMaster
(Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.)
To: DungeonMaster
Of course, one can tell what is porn and what is not. While there is a gray area - a continuum as in many areas in life, this does not mean one cannot tell porn from nonporn. What nonsense. As someone who just joined last year, I believe you just want to argue.
147 posted on
03/22/2007 7:14:07 AM PDT by
Dante3
To: DungeonMaster
Blue haired Baptist ladies would certainly not think a picture of woman wearing shorts is porn!!! We have sense enough to know the difference! I am not blue haired, but Baptist raised makes me know that isn't true! Hopefully you were joking. Porn is not impossible to define!
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson