Should graphic pornography be banned?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlemagne_III
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JapaneseKappa said:
And how has this trip down your alleged road “pick your pocket or break your leg?”
Click to expand...
It has done more than broken my leg. It has broken my heart. It has broken the hearts of all people who understand that the agenda of pornography is the devil’s own agenda. Porn has destroyed lives and brought performers in the infamous trade to die of suicide or disease. When they could have done something worthy of their destiny and dignity as human beings, they threw that away and worshiped the almighty Phallus. Society has in effect applauded and said, “Go ahead, stupid!” You might say society is just as stupid for buying the stuff and so enabling the trade to last forever, just so they could have the pleasures of a Peeping Tom.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
As I said earlier, as recently as 60 years ago Hollywood and society at large knew what was acceptable and what was not.
Click to expand...
Wot?

Your benchmark is the materialist gratification of 1950s Hollywood, world capital of hedonism?

Not 1905 when the scandalous photo in post #198 was taken. Not present day North Africa, where a woman in short sleeves in public is scandalous.

Who made you boss of the world?

Charlemagne, are you a moral relativist? :rolleyes:

😛
 
Charlemagne_III said:
Listen to yourself.

You get to decide that child pornography is a depravity but adult pornography is just fine?

Who made you the pope of morality? 😉
Click to expand...
I clearly explained why Child Pornography is wrong.

**I’m going to shock you;
**
I don’t need a God to know that Child porn is a horrific wrong. Not only do I know it’s wrong, but I can articulate why it is wrong. All without a God.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
It has done more than broken my leg. It has broken my heart. It has broken the hearts of all people who understand that the agenda of pornography is the devil’s own agenda. Porn has destroyed lives and brought performers in the infamous trade to die of suicide or disease. When they could have done something worthy of their destiny and dignity as human beings, they threw that away and worshiped the almighty Phallus. Society has in effect applauded and said, “Go ahead, stupid!” You might say society is just as stupid for buying the stuff and so enabling the trade to last forever, just so they could have the pleasures of a Peeping Tom.
Click to expand...
But as far as I know, no one gets arrested because they broke someones heart with an emotional breakup. It seems more like you’re trying to win a “who can be the most incensed by porn” contest rather than make a reasonable case. Its not uncommon, I see it all the time in gatherings of religious people; they try to be perceived as the most morally upright by being the most vocally morally outraged.

The working conditions of sex workers is a question for workplace safety regulators. If you tried to ban every institution with unsafe working conditions, you’d have to answer to a lot of unhappy coal miners.

I will also point out that Catholicism still holds that it is (in theory) morally permissible for someone to sell themselves into slavery. Now, I don’t expect Catholicism to accept the morality of pornography, but it seems that any argument based on “porn is the sale of human dignity” rings rather hollow in light of the Catholic position on slavery.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
I refer you to an earlier post. I’m not going to write a manual here of what pornography is and what it is not. Do you think I am so silly as to take on that responsibility all by myself?

As I said earlier, as recently as 60 years ago Hollywood and society at large knew what was acceptable and what was not. Standards were set in place by those considered trustworthy to set them, and they were religiously followed. If it could be done once before, it could be done again.

The corrupted hedonists don’t have to win every round in the battle for civilization.

Pornography should be fought like any other disease, not as a right to be sick in mind and body. A civilization that could arrange a lunar landing should still be crafty enough to combat and destroy sexual lunacy.
Click to expand...
Yes. It can be done. Human dignity requires Human Decency in all things.

Sexual lunacy is all about pleasure and in order to not feel guilty, let’s make it available to everyone so we can create new generations of deviants.

Self-control is the key to proper behavior.

Porn violates human decency and exposes the public to activities that should remain 100% private.

Ed
 
987mk said:
If adults wish to record and share their experiences with like minded adults, I say let them.
Click to expand...
Of course you would as an exploiter of women.
You do realize than all those photographs you masterbate to are of people damaged by sexual abuse as children. You think your interest heals them any?
Just so you can get your jollies in your little isolated world.
Something to brag about - going from neurosis to sociopathy.
 
Aloysium said:
Of course you would as an exploiter of women.
You do realize than all those photographs you masterbate to are of people damaged by sexual abuse as children. You think your interest heals them any?
Click to expand...
All of them? Every single one? You seem remarkably familiar with the porn that he/she watches. How do you know he/she doesn’t have a stash of pictures of his/her spouse?
 
Aloysium said:
photographs you masterbate to are of people damaged by sexual abuse as children.
Click to expand...
How do you know that every pornographic / nude model / actor / player is a victim of childhood sexual abuse?

You personally know some of my acquaintances and former partners with whom I’ve had relations?
 
I wholly endorse Britain’s opt-in policy concerning the pornographic internet. It does not censor anything, but it makes these decisions social and communal. Any other policy involves exposing minors to pornography.

The library policies in America are shameful.

Should all porn be banned? Yes. But such a ban is not consistent with the current constitutional structure of America. So much the worse for the current constitutional structure of America.
 
For those interested, there’s tons of literature out there showing a high correlation between being a member of the sex trade and a history of childhood abuse. It does not mean that people who are sexually abused as kids will in large part become prostitutes, nor that all sex trade workers were sexually abused. When I comment, I assume that the reader has some basic knowledge of the world in which they participate. Clearly some people have absolutely no clue as to nature of the lives of the people whose genitals they masturbate to. My knowledge comes from working with the disadvantaged and hearing their stories. mk, I hope I do not know some of the people with whom you have had relations; the stories are terrible. BTW, when you say relations, you mean in your imagination right. You and JK should be ashamed of yourselves.
 
Linusthe2nd said:
Any gratuitous appeals to the sexual appetite done publically in any venue should be outlawed. I make not apologies. Public spaces should be free from gratuitus sexual appeals.
Click to expand...
So you don’t want to ban it. You just want it removed from public spaces. That’s quite reasonable.
Charlemagne_III said:
I refer you to an earlier post. I’m not going to write a manual here of what pornography is and what it is not.
Click to expand...
If we don’t know where you would like to draw the line in the sand, then how can we agree to have one?

Charles: I want pornography banned.
Bradski: Then will you give me your definition of pornography so we know what exactly you would find acceptable?
Charles: No, I won’t.
 
Bradski said:
Charles: I want pornography banned.
Bradski: Then will you give me your definition of pornography so we know what exactly you would find acceptable?
Charles: No, I won’t.
Click to expand...
Would you be OK with a complete ban on photographic imagery of the genitals in the midst of sexual contact? That would be one place to draw the line, and I think it would help a great deal, without outlawing valid artistic renderings of the naked body.
 
Prodigal_Son said:
Would you be OK with a complete ban on photographic imagery of the genitals in the midst of sexual contact? That would be one place to draw the line, and I think it would help a great deal, without outlawing valid artistic renderings of the naked body.
Click to expand...
So paintings would be OK? Cartoons? CGI? Pornographic literature? Pictures of men or women on their own are OK? Are we talking film as well? Theatre? Who decides if it’s art or not? Would you ban people from taking pictures of themselves? What if a group of people want to watch each other? And film it? How about sado masochism that doesn’t show the genitals? Is it only the genitals you are concerned with? Is it OK if they are not touching?

I could go on, but you get the idea…
 
Bradski said:
So paintings would be OK? Cartoons? CGI? Pornographic literature? Pictures of men or women on their own are OK? Are we talking film as well? Theatre? Who decides if it’s art or not? Would you ban people from taking pictures of themselves? What if a group of people want to watch each other? And film it? How about sado masochism that doesn’t show the genitals? Is it only the genitals you are concerned with? Is it OK if they are not touching?

I could go on, but you get the idea…
Click to expand...
No, I don’t get the idea. All laws make somewhat arbitrary boundaries. Think about the age of consent – it’s arbitrary, to some extent, but that doesn’t mean we should lower it to 10.

The law would ban the sale or public display of explicit sexual photography or video, and would define the internet as a public display. (Email wouldn’t count). It wouldn’t ban sado-masochism, nudity, or art.

It wouldn’t be that hard to enforce. We already have decently enforced laws against child pornography on the books.
 
Bradski said:
So you don’t want to ban it. You just want it removed from public spaces. That’s quite reasonable.

If we don’t know where you would like to draw the line in the sand, then how can we agree to have one?

Charles: I want pornography banned.
Bradski: Then will you give me your definition of pornography so we know what exactly you would find acceptable?
Charles: No, I won’t.
Click to expand...
I suppose we would approach it like smoking. We could make it very, very expensive and drive the perverts back to the burlesque houses and the peep shoes. But I have a right to my moral space just like everyone has a right to a smoke free environment. No one has a right to put their filfth in my space, no one.

And I would ban just as much as the public would tolerate.

Linus2nd
 
987mk said:
I clearly explained why Child Pornography is wrong.

**I’m going to shock you;
**
I don’t need a God to know that Child porn is a horrific wrong. Not only do I know it’s wrong, but I can articulate why it is wrong. All without a God.
Click to expand...
Glad to hear it.

Linus2nd
 
Linusthe2nd said:
But I have a right to my moral space just like everyone has a right to a smoke free environment. No one has a right to put their filfth in my space, no one.
Click to expand...
I agree. But just where are you seeing all this graphic pornography? Where do you live, for heaven’s sake?
 
JapaneseKappa said:
But as far as I know, no one gets arrested because they broke someones heart with an emotional breakup. It seems more like you’re trying to win a “who can be the most incensed by porn” contest rather than make a reasonable case. Its not uncommon, I see it all the time in gatherings of religious people; they try to be perceived as the most morally upright by being the most vocally morally outraged.
The working conditions of sex workers is a question for workplace safety regulators. If you tried to ban every institution with unsafe working conditions, you’d have to answer to a lot of unhappy coal miners.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top