[PLUG-TALK] Porn on the Net...

Aaron ke7ezt at gmail.com
Wed Oct 28 02:04:22 UTC 2009


aaron at kalosaurusrex:~$
Discere docendo - To learn through teaching.
Libera Te Tutemet - You, free yourself.




On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 17:04, Michael Robinson <plug_1 at robinson-west.com>wrote:

>
> On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 15:22 -0700, Aaron wrote:
> > I don't mean any offence or anything, I enjoy a good debate.  This is
> > good stuff.
> >
> > I think that there should be more personal accountability in the
> > choices people make.  I personally don't need the government to make
> > moral choices for me.  That's up to me, and something I will have to
> > live with.  I don't need the goverment babysitting me and what I am
> > doing.  I feel that goes against the core of what this country was
> > founded on.  The freedom of choice.  The freedom to make the choices
> > of what we are okay with in our own lives.
> >
> > If someone has an addiction I think there are lots of
> > resources--government funded, church or other religious resources,
> > family and friends.  I think that if someone is doing something
> > illegal they should be accountable for that and the law should be
> > followed and enforced.  If someone is doing something legal and it's
> > effecting their life in a negative way they should have the personal
> > accountability to seek out the help to make their life better.  If
> > someone doesn't care about the quality of their life it shouldn't be
> > up to the government to make the moral judgements to make their life
> > better.
> >
> > I believe in personal accountability and making choices that bring
> > positive things into my life--and I think it should be the persons
> > responsibility to make choices that make the life they want. Not the
> > government.
>
> The production and consumption of porn, whether through the Net or by
> other means, is always and has always been sex abuse.  Government
> is supposed to protect it's citizens against abuse.  As far as
> arguing with me that an addict has a choice, I have not seen one
> convincing argument yet to back that up.  Porn is one of the easiest
> things to get a hold of thanks to the Net and quite possibly one of
> the most addictive.  I base this assertion on the fact that the adult
> entertainment industry, and no that name does not make it legit, rakes
> in over a billion dollars a year.  Before the Net, porn was limited to
> magazines and seedy bars.  Most people were embarrassed if they got
> caught with dirty magazines or were seen walking into a nude dancing
> bar.  The Net has turned that upside down.  Nowadays, there is the
> possibility of anonymously consuming porn, though one shouldn't assume
> that they are anonymous.
>

Please prove that porn is "sex abuse".  I don't think it's the governments
job to protect against what you perceive as abuse and that I do not.  I
think in most cases in the US it's of free will that everyone participates.
Although I can't prove it, I think that if someone wants to be in the sex
industry that they apply, and get paid.  I don't think that people that
didn't want to be involved would do it.  Just because an industry makes a
lot of money doesn't make it bad.  Take for example the banking
industry--which I think screws over a lot more ordinary people than the sex
industry.  I think people will find what they want regardless of the
internet.



>
> Anonymous or not, consuming or producing porn is sex abuse.  Government
> is supposed to prevent the abuse of it's citizens.  Abusers always hide
> behind consent as an excuse for the way they are treating themselves
> and others.  That doesn't make what they are doing right.
>
>
Please prove that pron is sex abuse.



> As far as the comment that I'm saying open source software is bad, I
> never said that.  Free software that is open source does not
> constitute an act of abuse the way "free porn" does.
>
> Sex is supposed to be private between a male husband and his female
> wife and open to children.  Porn violates the privacy part.  Porn
> also violates the open to children part.  Every child deserves to
> be the result of a loving union between a husband and his wife, but
> porn threatens that.  Consumers of porn are more likely to cheat on
> their wives or become promiscuous in general.  Porn increases the
> likelihood that STD's will spread.  Killing the woman is where porn
> can ultimately lead do to it's failure to satisfy consumers, which
> is unacceptable period.
>

I think that people can have relations with non-wife females. I think two
consenting adults can do what they wish.  I don't understand your "open to
children part". Please explain this.

I know people that have huge porn collections are deeply committed to their
wives.  So I don't get the relation.  I think people having unprotected sex
spreads STDs.  I think that sitting at home alone watching porn is STD
free.  I think that majority of people that watch porn do no kill females.
Please prove this.


>
> The issue of porn on the Net is NOT a matter of personal responsibility.
> Porn when it exists is a social sin.  A social sin involves everyone.
> The consumer of porn is as guilty as the producer of it.  To protect
> children and those adults who will not pay for porn that could otherwise
> become addicted to "free porn," government needs to do something.  I'm
> surprised that no feminists are speaking up in favor of cracking down on
> Internet porn.  Most porn involves women.  There is a sex trade in the
> world and it is even alive here in the good ol USA, though it tends to
> be a more serious problem in Islamic/Atheistic countries.
>
>
Most porn involves males and females.  Most porn involves willing people of
both sexes doing it.  Please tell me about the sex trade here in the US.
Also in most Islamic (what country is Ahtiestic and what does that have to
do with the porn industry?) have a worse problem of the sex industry. There
are stats on this. You can see that a LOT of the porn searching on the
internet comes from country's that forbid male to female interaction. This
is a proven fact!  The more open a society the less that the sex industry
thrives because it's human nature to want sex!! It's NATURAL!



> Outlawing "free porn" does not constitute babysitting people.  The
> target of law enforcement will be web sites that are not in compliance
> with the no "free porn," statutes.  The point of such a law will be to
> take pressure off of the consumers and put it on the producers instead.
> The consumers too often are the ones who get in trouble while the
> producers face no consequences.  Free speech has to take a back seat
> to human rights.  There is a right to privacy with regards to sex
> which porn by it's very public nature violates.  Attacking the source
> of porn by going after the producers of it leaves the consumer alone
> and gives that consumer a chance to stop consuming porn without
> anyone finding out that they have a problem.
>

I would rather the police focus on pedos and people taking advantage of
people.  If they are wasting their time on consenting adults I find this a
terrible waste of tax money and resources.  Consenting adults should be
allowed to do what they want. Pedos and people doing things against the law
should be the focus of the police and tax resources.  Not people viewing and
doing things within the law.  If someone wants to be involved in the sex
industry it's their choice. If someone wants to watch porn it's their
choice!  Freedom of choice is what America is founded on!  If you want
people to force their views on you--you are free to move to North Korea or
another country where things are restricted.  I think you will find it a
terrible place to live. Freeeeedom!!!  You don't have to approve.  You just
have to make a choice to not look at porn. It's that simple.


>
> I want to see an international standard get adopted with an
> international police force to enforce it that puts an end
> to "free porn" on the Net.


> _______________________________________________
> PLUG-talk mailing list
> PLUG-talk at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pdxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-talk/attachments/20091027/c1c658a8/attachment.html>


More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list