We agree porn is bad, but should it be banned?

  • Thread starter Thread starter XndrK
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem with a ban is that porn cannot be defined. If we ban Playboy, we’ll also end up banning Michelangelo’s “The Creation of Adam” and brochures illustrating how to perform a breast self-exam.
 
Babinicz said:
Maybe healthy men who hasnt ever had a problem with porn can look at these.

But its a fact that porn destroys your brain for a long time.
Click to expand...
I think you may be being a bit over hyperbolic there my friend.

Otherwise we could say about half of all American men are walking around with destroyed brains and are quite unhealthy…

Such exaggerations really don’t help move this conversation forward in a meaningful manner.
 
SugarMagnolia said:
The problem with a ban is that porn cannot be defined. If we ban Playboy, we’ll also end up banning Michelangelo’s “The Creation of Adam” and brochures illustrating how to perform a breast self-exam.
Click to expand...
No, porn can and is defined. No one has trouble defining child porn.

I’m not sure playboy is pornography but it is still obscene. Obscene works may be more difficult to define but this is why we have juries.
 
Maybe I forgot to add “when someone watches it for a long time”
 
Yes, it should be banned. It’s not art. It’s only purpose is arousal.
 
That’s true that obscene materials don’t get 1A protection, but I think BoyGenius is mistakenly assuming the law considers “porn” and “obscenity” to be synonymous. (In reality they are, but the law makes a distinction.)
 
It’s not that meaningful in practice. The real fight is over what constitutes obscenity.
 
Porn should be banned. On a psychology point of view, it causes erotica in pedophiles who go after children. True
And …

According to federal laws, a person or company cannot:

…send obscene material through the U.S. mail (18 U.S.C. § 1461)

… use any common carrier (such as UPS or FedEx) to transport obscene material (18 U.S.C. § 1462)

… bring in obscene material from outside the country (18 U.S.C. § 1462)

…distribute obscene material through the Internet or any interactive computing device (18 U.S.C. § 1462)

… receive obscene material through the Internet or any interactive computing device (18 U.S.C. § 1462)

…broadcast obscene material over the public airwaves (18 U.S.C. § 1464)

…transport obscene material across state lines, including via the Internet (18 U.S.C. § 1465)

…create obscene material with intent to transport across state lines or export internationally (18 U.S.C. § 1465)

…engage in the business of selling or distributing obscene material that has been transported across state lines or internationally (18 U.S.C. § 1466)

…transmit obscene material through cable or satellite systems, include subscription services (18 U.S.C. § 1468)

…transmit obscene communications across state lines or internationally through a telephonic device (47 U.S.C. § 223)

…knowingly distribute obscene materials to minors under 16 years old (18 U.S.C. § 1470)

…knowingly use a misleading domain name to deceive people into viewing obscene content (18 U.S.C. § 2252B)

…knowingly embed words or digital images into the source code of a website to deceive people into viewing obscene content (18 U.S.C. § 2252C)

In addition to federal laws, most states have adopted laws prohibiting obscene material. So, if these laws are governed to keep the trade business from receiving porn materials, they are breaking the law from transporting materials to shops and stores. Personally, I think they doing it hand to hand.

Does anyone know the definition of pornography? It’s showing off one’s extremities, without clothes for stimulation.

More importantly, Do you think our Heavenly Father would approve of this? I don’t think so. Furthermore, Pope John Paul II spoke against it.So, does Pope Francis. Pope Francis calls it, “filth”

I have my view on this topic.

God Bless everyone.
 
Last edited:
No, you can legally mail pornography in the United States. Do you think every guy with a subscription to Penthouse is doing some cloak-and-dagger handoff in an alley at 2 am?

Again, people are assuming that all pornography meets the legal definition of obscenity. It does not. (Maybe it should, but it doesn’t under the current legal framework.)
 
Porn should be banned, yes.
If for the simple reason that it objectifies people and causes young men and women to have expectations of their partners that simply (or likely) won’t be fulfilled.
So wrong on any number of levels.
If we have to keep custody of our eyes, and not covet persons that are not our spouses then why would we permit porn to thrive? And it IS thriving today.
 
No.

Making something that is already illegal legal is very different than making something currently legal illegal.
 
I think it should be banned, of course. It’s useless. There is no good in it at all. Just because it is hard to ban, difficult to police shouldn’t stop us. It’s difficult to ban child abuse, drugs, assault, speeding etc. but if we give up then well that’s on us. We can’t just let sin go unchecked just cos it is difficult to do so, isn’t that what being a Christian is all about, isn’t it a spiritual work of mercy. Yeah so in my opinion, we have to try no matter how hopeless a situation it appears to be or how hard or difficult it is. God is on our side anyway and he makes the impossible possible.
 
If pornography isn’t obscene than what is? I mean for people who say it isn’t they must not think anything is obscene.
Bluebright said:
Just because it is hard to ban, difficult to police shouldn’t stop us
Click to expand...
Actually it is easier to control than most other things. The primary means it comes to us is the heavily regulated telecommunication corporations. The second is print which is easy enough to monitor. Sure some people may posses and privately transmit it but that would be a huge reduction in availability and access.
 
exnihilo said:
Actually it is easier to control than most other things. The primary means it comes to us is the heavily regulated telecommunication corporations. The second is print which is easy enough to monitor. Sure some people may posses and privately transmit it but that would be a huge reduction in availability and access.
Click to expand...
You think so? No offence but you are thinking of legal porn. If that is limited or banned it will simply go underground even more than it already is and it is already there. As for what is online, what you see if not even half of what is there. Computer crime and skills are changing all the time. Keeping up is costly. I am not saying we shouldn’t do it, or rather authorities shouldn’t but perhaps you are in a different country to me, different laws, more money. We can agree to disagree. I don’t think it’s easy to control at all.
 
The first amendment was never intended to cover pornography.

Any society which refuses to ban pornography is already dead.
 
You can’t ban pornography when people’s sensitivities to it deaden to the point where it’s considered normal. That is the tactic of the modernist.
 
Of course it will go underground. But there will be less of it. I live in the US. The government was able to end internet gambling here. They are able to uncover online child pornography rings. They are able to monitor all of our emails. They definitely could stop most pornography. I don’t think they will stop all of it. But if that is our standard then we ought to give up the tens of thousands of other things that are illegal.
 
One sad aspect of the port industry is the sad state of a lot of the people who get sucked into that industry. Unfortunately, I know a few people who have ruined their lives.

I continue to pray for them. Maybe, just maybe, tighter laws might help some of those sad people.
 
It would kinda suck if it were made illegal and a hacker put files on your computer. Kinda like how they already do with malware and viruses etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top