Should Free Access to Internet Porn be Eliminated?

[Silent Method]

Should free access to internet porn be eliminated?

I'm going to say yes. Now I like looking at nude young things as much as the other guy, but allowing free access to some of the filth being presented on porn sites presents a moral delima.

I believe pornography, especially that which a reasonable person would call hardcore, is destructive. Nevertheless, as adults we make our own choices regarding the materials which we consume.

The issues regarding free internet access to pornography, however, are not limited to adult consumption. Kids love to surf the net. Kids also love to look at naked boobies. Kids are also smart enough to find ways to bypass content restricting programs.

I feel that a great deal of the pornographic content available free of charge on the internet is very destructive to the children who view it.


What say you?

 

[Testosterone boy]

The internet is a very big business that is fairly dependent on porn in my estimation.

I don't know. What do you call porn?

I'm not sure if porn is all bad. Given the temperments of our women, sometimes I think porn is necessary.

Tough question for sure. Some nations don't allow it. Are they better off?

 

[milo hobgoblin]

LOL

are you fucking joking?

Why dont you tell all these LAZY fucking parents to monitor thier kids computer usage... I dont let my kids NEAR the internet if Im not home

why should all of mankind suffer because some dumb fuck is too stupid to secure his PC's.

and why are people so stressed out about porn... thye let thier kids watch all kinds of violence and mayhem on TV and dont say a fucking word...

a kid sees one tit and they lose their fucking mind...

Id rather have my kid look at some girls boobs than watch Rambo any day.

people need to get their priorities straight.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

You said moral dilemma. Morality should not be legislated.

 

[HULKSTER]

You said moral dilemma. Morality should not be legislated.

Skywalker for Mod!!! .....oh, wait a minute......

 

[plornive]

It's implausible to enforce anyway. We can't start blocking all foreign sites related to porn. Even within the country, it is difficult to enforece.

Besides that, I don't want any censorship. I believe porn should be available everywhere for children too.

 

[ajtomasi]

what kind of parent even lets their child touch a computer, let along the internet?

no wonder these kids are shoting each other and having oral sex

 

[Robert Jan]

Of course not you idiot.

You are lucky enough to be born into the age of free porn and you ask THIS? are you mad? did you forget your medication?

Its ok... just go with the white mr... be good.



Why is it damaging for a kid who is old enough to outsmart a NetNanny type of program, to see porn?

Just what problems would these kids have to deal with? Knowing what a nude girl or sex looks like? why the hell shouldn`t they know? what will it do to them? I watched porn from a young age.
I really wouldn`t know how it caused problems.

 

[supersizeme]

hey, big brain, as mentioned earlier...how do you plan on enforcing that with foreign websites?

 

[p0ink]

why do so many people care about kids?

if they turn out fucked up, blame the parents not society.

plus, i dont think i should be punished, because some politician doesnt want little billy seeing some boobs and ropes of semen flying across the air.

 

[p0ink]

hey, big brain, as mentioned earlier...how do you plan on enforcing that with foreign websites?

you forgot to mention p2p, ftp sites, irc, etc.

 

[The Whole F/N Show]

No I don't think so. Freedom of speech. Blah blah blah. How about good parenting? That should be focused on 1st an formost. And by the way kids have always looked at porn. Somebody knew somebody who's dad had them around relatively available. I remember my grandpa keep nudie magazines under the mattress in the guest bedroom. I was certainly when I discovered that one summer.

 

[p0ink]

i got an internet connection in 7th grade, and you can bet you ass i was checking out porn.

i turned out more than 'alright'.

 

[ajtomasi]

the simples answer is that children should not be allowed to use computers, duh

 

[Silent Method]

You said moral dilemma. Morality should not be legislated.

I ask you, what is law if not moral convention?

Regardless, i said nothing of legislation or law. This is a question of the way things ought to be - not the way the government ought to run things.


It's funny how many of you took this in the direction of issues of law rather than intrinsic human responsibility.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

I ask you, what is law if not moral convention?

Regardless, i said nothing of legislation or law. This is a question of the way things ought to be - not the way the government ought to run things.

It's funny how many of you took this in the direction of issues of law rather than intrinsic human responsibility.

well, you are calling for free access to I-porn being eliminated. Who else could eliminate this across the board, other than government?

I think you are dodging my response behind semantics.

Law is not moral convention. Law is a system for protecting rights of citizens.

 

[manny78]

Don't you think we have enough legislations ? And why the govt. should make laws on that ? WHo is he/she to decide what's morally good or not for me ?

 

[ajtomasi]

let's discuss the differences between morals and ethics

 

[Silent Method]

well, you are calling for free access to I-porn being eliminated. Who else could eliminate this across the board, other than government?

I think you are dodging my response behind semantics.

The people. That is, those who create the websites. "The government" couldn't eliminate internet porn if it wanted to.

It was not my intent to dodge your question.

Law is not moral convention. Law is a system for protecting rights of citizens.

Now I will argue semantics.

Protecting the rights of citizens IS moral convention. Morality is nothing more than the idea that your rights stop where the victimization of another's rights begin. Social convention governs the boundries of these rights. Law is essentialy social convention based onthe idea that your rights stop where the victimization of another's rights begin - morality.

 

[2Thick]

Europe and Canada show nudity and sexuality readily.

Both areas have a higher standard of life, lower poverty, lower crime and a highly intelligent populace.

on the other hand, the US is the opposite and it has more anti-porn laws than both.

You do the math...

 

[Optimus B]

Europe and Canada show nudity and sexuality readily.

Both areas have a higher standard of life, lower poverty, lower crime and a highly intelligent populace.

on the other hand, the US is the opposite and it has more anti-porn laws than both.

You do the math...

(in my best homer simpson impersonation) ahh porn, is there anything it can't do?

 

[THE SWAMI]

why not just charge for every website while you are at it. that would be great.

 

[Frackal]

What exactly about porn do you find destructive silent method?

 

[Silent Method]

Europe and Canada show nudity and sexuality readily.

Both areas have a higher standard of life, lower poverty, lower crime and a highly intelligent populace.

on the other hand, the US is the opposite and it has more anti-porn laws than both.

You do the math...

I'd wager 5 years salary that American consumers digest more pornography than Canada and Europe combined.

Regardless, my issue is not with simple nudity and sexuality.

 

[XBiker]

I am of the belief that porn can replace foreplay.

 

[WODIN]

This is just crazy talk! Porn is the only thing keeping me from killing you all!!! All I say!!!

 

[javaguru]

Kids were corrupt before movies, radio, rock n roll, video games and the internet. They'll still be corrupt after the christian right attacks the next big "corrupter" of children.

 

[Y_lifter]

KIDS.. They're the devil I tell you...

 

[Silent Method]

What exactly about porn do you find destructive silent method?

For one, I think that the very act of creation of a good deal of pornography is a destructive endeavor. (But of course adults have the right to do as the please in regard to self-destructing activity.)

However, my primary objection is the utter disrespect for which it fosters in regard to sex, relationships, and especially women. I think most people agree that a the nude female form is wonderful. To celebrate this form is wonderful as well.

However, there is a difference between celebrating the female body and a good deal of the material presented on porn sites. There is a difference between art and a woman with a coke bottle inserted into her anus, a man's fist inserted into her vagina, and six midgets ejaculating into her face.

Here is a list of gallery descriptions from one popular free porn directory:

-asian gets extreme needle torture
-Asian slut
-Helpless victim of three monster cocks
-movies of black whore self fisting
-Sleazy Hustler Sluts
-Busty Beach Slut
-Young guy fucks mother and her daughter
-Try to eat all the Cum bitch
-Super Fisting Slut
-Blonde slut getting fucked in all holes by 2 guys
-Piss All Over Me Fucker
-Midgets Fucking And Sucking
-One horny guy and two nasty sluts dirty orgy
-schoolgirl in brutal bondage gagged and tied up
-Chick Tricked for Sex
-Her Fist And Foot Rip My Holes
-Blonde Whore Gets Pounded

Look around our society, hell, look at many members of this board. The idea that women are dirty slut whores that are good only for the wet holes that they offer is rampant.

Let me make clear that I am not blaming porn for this. (I'm more inclined to blame that mindset for the type of porn to which I object.) I do, however, believe that much of the material offered freely on the web reinforces this idea.

 

[plornive]

For one, I think that the very act of creation of a good deal of pornography is a destructive endeavor. (But of course adults have the right to do as the please in regard to self-destructing activity.)

However, my primary objection is the utter disrespect for which it fosters in regard to sex, relationships, and especially women. I think most people agree that a the nude female form is wonderful. To celebrate this form is wonderful as well.

However, there is a difference between celebrating the female body and a good deal of the material presented on porn sites. There is a difference between art and a woman with a coke bottle inserted into her anus, a man's fist inserted into her vagina, and six midgets ejaculating into her face.

Here is a list of gallery descriptions from one popular free porn directory:

-asian gets extreme needle torture
-Asian slut
-Helpless victim of three monster cocks
-movies of black whore self fisting
-Sleazy Hustler Sluts
-Busty Beach Slut
-Young guy fucks mother and her daughter
-Try to eat all the Cum bitch
-Super Fisting Slut
-Blonde slut getting fucked in all holes by 2 guys
-Piss All Over Me Fucker
-Midgets Fucking And Sucking
-One horny guy and two nasty sluts dirty orgy
-schoolgirl in brutal bondage gagged and tied up
-Chick Tricked for Sex
-Her Fist And Foot Rip My Holes
-Blonde Whore Gets Pounded

Look around our society, hell, look at many members of this board. The idea that women are dirty slut whores that are good only for the wet holes that they offer is rampant.

Let me make clear that I am not blaming porn for this. (I'm more inclined to blame that mindset for the type of porn to which I object.) I do, however, believe that much of the material offered freely on the web reinforces this idea.

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.

 

[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.