[PLUG-TALK] Porn on the Net...
Michael Robinson
plug_1 at robinson-west.com
Tue Oct 27 22:02:30 UTC 2009
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 14:22 -0700, Aaron wrote:
> Have you worked in the adult industry to know if there is free choice
> or not? I haven't--I have no idea what it's like. But I know that I
> have the freedom of choice to choose if I'm going to watch or not.
>
> As for the abuse..everyone does have a choice about abusing something.
> No addiction isn't usually a choice per se, but the abuser can get
> help to give them more options. Rather than saying alcohol is bad and
> should be banned and ruining it for everyone else. Just because one
> person has a problem doesn't mean everyone else does.
>
> aaron at kalosaurusrex:~$
> Discere docendo - To learn through teaching.
> Libera Te Tutemet - You, free yourself.
I never said that alcohol is a problem for everyone. Porn is different.
Porn is immoral from every angle. It doesn't involve consenting adults
and it is not narrowly focused to a single couple. "Free" porn should
be outlawed, period. It is illegal to prostitute oneself on Burnside,
it shouldn't be legal to prostitute oneself on cyber Burnside.
As far as the denial you are expressing about choice, I feel sorry for
you. An alcoholic doesn't have a choice about abusing alcohol. A pot
head doesn't have a choice about smoking marijuana. A true pedophile
doesn't have a choice about sexually abusing children. The best course
of action with the alcoholic, the pot head, and the pedophile is to keep
them away from that which they are prone to abuse. Hopefully in time,
they will heal from their addiction and be free of it.
Making sex a for sale commodity is bad for society. This selling of sex
encourages promiscuity, abandonment in the event of pregnancy, and worse
than that sex becoming a cash item encourages sexual abuse of all kinds.
In the military, viewing pornography will get you immediately
discharged.
You are taking the delusional misguided position that porn is good for
someone. Anyone who views porn for any reason at all has a problem.
Viewing porn creates an audience for it which increases the likelihood
that there will be more porn produced. As far as the abuser can get
help comment, it's a multi billion dollar industry which suggests to
me that very few people indeed are getting help.
Anyone who views porn that can't leave it alone totally is an addict.
That covers most people who view porn. It isn't hard to get to porn
on the Net and I'm not just talking about "legal" porn. Child porn,
incest, etcetera is just as easy to find as any other type of porn.
It doesn't matter if you are a child or a 99 year old man, most of
the porn on the Net can be viewed "for free" without identifying
yourself.
Government needs to step in when it comes to the porn industry where
it so far has not done anything.
There was a you cannot comment on God comment. I didn't say what God's
position is, I merely suggested that He will have his way in the end.
If the Oregon Supreme Court truly thinks that obscenity is not open to
being regulated, then it is sorely mistaken. It is just a matter of
time till the people or Oregon wake up morally and demand basic
regulation of obscenity. Requiring Net sites that show porn to collect
credit card information before they do so would stop most children from
viewing it. It would stop people who aren't willing to spend money to
view porn and address the I am addicted to free porn problem that many
people have. If the pornography industry takes a nose dive after a ban
on "free" porn is enforced world wide, great.
More information about the PLUG-talk
mailing list