Should Free Access to Internet Porn be Eliminated?

[Silent Method]

Yeah yeah yeah...

This is just representative of the fact that men and women have definite sociosexual roles in society. This is acted out in sex and taken to it's conclusion.

This is legislation of morality. When I say morality, I mean anything that is not utilitarean. True, individual rights could be considered "morals", but I think it is more accurately defined by classical liberalism and the idea of civility.

When I say morality, I mean that which victimizes others. Yes yes, the interpretation of this is debatable for eternity. However, a reassert that the idea of "civility" is based on moral convention. Sociology bears this out.

 

[plornive]

When I say morality, I mean that which victimizes others. Yes yes, the interpretation of this is debatable for eternity. However, a reassert that the idea of "civility" is based on moral convention. Sociology bears this out.

I think there is a difference between the academic idea of individual rights and actual morality. The academic idea of individual rights is what should be legislated. Morality could include sexual behavior and other things that classical liberalism does not delve into.

Civil society also has a very clear definition.

 

[plornive]

Maybe I don't understand what you are saying....

 

[Silent Method]

I think there is a difference between the academic idea of individual rights and actual morality. The academic idea of individual rights is what should be legislated. Morality could include sexual behavior and other things that classical liberalism does not delve into.

Again, I believe the academic idea of individual rights IS moral convention. As I said before, morality is nothing more than the idea that your rights stop where the victimization of another's rights begin. Any "academic idea of individual rights" is simply convention.

 

[plornive]

Again, I believe the academic idea of individual rights IS moral convention. As I said before, morality is nothing more than the idea that your rights stop where the victimization of another's rights begin. Any "academic idea of individual rights" is simply convention.

Ok, now I understand you, and here is what I think...

Individual rights is a subset of all forms of morality. It is not a complete representation of all moral convention. It is ONE component and ONE idea out of many. That is why "morality" is too broad.

I could say that blasphemy or drinking alcohol alone is immoral, but that has nothing to do with individual rights. Some people would say that it is moral to be slaves to the state. This is not what should be legislated.

The academic definitions of liberalism and civility define individual rights nicely.

 

[Silent Method]

Ok, now I understand you, and here is what I think...

Individual rights is a subset of all forms of morality. It is not a complete representation of all moral convention. It is ONE component and ONE idea out of many. That is why "morality" is too broad.

I could say that blasphemy or drinking alcohol alone is immoral, but that has nothing to do with individual rights.

For the purpose of pure humanistic and sociological application, we are in agreement on this point.