WatchYeah the three stooges actually think they can get rid of porn from the Internet, and that they even have the right to do so. The anti-porn laws they are vowing to enforce will soon be declared Unconstitutional.
If these numb nuts want to start enforcing laws that aren't being enforced, they can start and end with anti-torture laws and anti-trust laws. There's nothing more perverted than a too-big-too-fail financial institution.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/13/santorum-romney-and-gingrich-vow-to-enforce-anti-porn-laws/
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
The Internet without porn? Wasn't porn the whole point of the Internet? Along with anonymous slander?
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
Dan8267 says
I don't think that they understand that each vid or pic you download is not actually "removing" it from the internet.
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
Isn't Utah one of the biggest buyers of internet porn?
This is going to really hurt Romney with his core supporters.
Follow
Befriend
53 threads
658 comments
Cloud says
Who cares about the little wretched brats?
But to answer your question, yes we should run porn 24/7 if it negatively impacts underclass brats. Your never too young to learn how to fluff men of stature and merit. Skills like that will last a lifetime.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,688 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
Does cloud still not understand what Ignore means? It means I don't see his trolly little posts.
Follow
Befriend (8)
203 threads
4,403 comments
Davis, CA
Yeah, let's drive porn back into the criminal underground where it belongs
:-P
Perhaps Mittens is sore about all those Utah dollars enriching California porn studios.
Follow
Befriend
16 threads
4,426 comments
Cloud says
These maybe the same gay friendly libs who still believed Mablesthorpes fist up someones ass is considered ART.
Follow
Befriend
16 threads
4,426 comments
Vicente says
Quote from Asia Carrera, former pornographic actress.
"I deliberately moved to St. George (Utah) with my husband so we could raise our kids in a conservative atmosphere, in a low-crime, family friendly state. I do appreciate that the laws are there, and will make it harder for my kids to get into trouble when they get older."
Follow
Befriend
16 threads
4,426 comments
Dan8267 says
Can be done... the technology is out there and should be implementated.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,688 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
thomas.wong1986 says
Any technology aimed at preventing the transmission of porn will be circumvented by other technology. People like porn. It ain't going away.
And why should the government be allowed to restrict access to porn? Sounds like a violation of the 1st Amendment in both speech and religion.
Follow
Befriend
16 threads
4,426 comments
Dan8267 says
No, infact its not a violaton of the 1st Amendment.. in your own state people do go to jail for porn.
http://www2.tbo.com/news/news/2008/oct/03/judge-sentences-porn-producer-46-month-prison-ar-115204/
Follow
Befriend
16 threads
4,426 comments
Dan8267 says
Hopefully we can implement technology to stop the hacking (and other acts of war) coming from China, North Korea, and Iran. As such we can also eliminate porn. It was never the purpose of many you started the internet to us it for porn distribution.
Follow
Befriend
40 threads
2,652 comments
Who gives a shit what these idiots think they could change? It's not like they'll get a chance to try it out.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Cloud, I don't get you.
You complain about government meddling in what we can eat (smoking, booze, butter, soda) but then think gov't should control what's on the internet.
There's a simple solution for keeping children away from porn: don't let them on the computer without supervision.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,616 comments
Cloud says
Hey Cloud, do you think guns can affect children in a negative way?
If a parent give their kids access to an unlimited amount of loaded firearms, would this in any way harm them?
Follow
Befriend (23)
55 threads
3,778 comments
Scottsdale, AZ
robertoaribas's website
Cloud says
thank you cloud for your excellent example of the STRAWMAN LOGIC FALLACY!!
It is getting hard to find someone so stupid today that they actually use this one, but here you are! thanks!
you see, the question at hand, is whether or not to remove all porn from the internet, NOT whether or not young children should watch porn! most people are smart enough to understand the difference.
As an analogy (you may need to look that word up) Lets say someone said "I believe it is ok for pilots to fly jumbo jets full of passangers and land them in our cities" would you respond with "do you think it ok for grade school aged kids to fly jumbo jets and land them in our cities?"
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
Dan8267 says
Apparently not.
I have Cloud on ignore as well, and judging by what I see quoted by others that ignore is still well justified.
Follow
Befriend
53 threads
658 comments
Porn belongs in Congress, the White House, and airport bathrooms not in the privacy of adult homes.
"When government outlaws anal beads, this outlaw will have anal beads."
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
thomas.wong1986 says
More of the same quote from pornographic actress Asia Carrera.
"Do I have a problem with porn being sold here[Utah]? No, not per se. I have no problem with porn at all. Trust me, they don't exploit women, and watching porn has never been scientifically shown to lead to any increase in crime rates, be it rape, pedophilia, or any other sexual crimes."
Why are you crafting arguments from ex-porn actress who doesn't seem to know what she is talking about anyway?
1. Utah, is not a low-crime state. It is however not a high-crime state. It is an "average" crime state.
2. While it is a very family friendly state, it is not very friendly to non-mormons. They can tend to feel isolated in their communities making it hard for them to find friends. Salt Lake city may be an exception to this.
Even though Utah is a leader in porn consumption, I doubt many mormon parents will be excited about their kids being friends with the children of a ex-porn star.
3. Kids that are not "good" i.e.- mormon, find it very easy to get into trouble in their teen years.
*edit*
And to add to #3 the law can and will come down very hard on kids that do get "out of line", and exception to this may be a mormon who is getting ready to go on a mission. Years ago I knew a mormon who was in front of a judge for committing a felony -- yes a felony and actually guilty, but no one was hurt. The judge made sure that this felony did not affect the guys ability to leave for his mission on time. I don't remember if the case was dismissed or reduced to a lesser charge. Anyway, a non-mormon kid would have been looking at possible jail time.
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
thomas.wong1986 says
Perhaps, but is is just the most profitable application of the internet. Why do you hate capitalism so much?
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
Dan8267 says
"Technology" has not been able to prevent the internet from distributing illegal copies of rated G Disney movies.
Yes, I am sure they will have much more success when it come to porn.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,616 comments
Cloud says
And there are restrictions on porn. So, what's the problem?
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,688 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
thomas.wong1986 says
Just because people go to jail under a law, doesn't mean the law isn't Unconstitutional. There are many, many problems with our legal system, and they are getting worse as the legal system becomes more and more profitable.
As for the First Amendment, it has always been interpreted to guarantee freedom of religion and speech. Restricting porn is a violation of both. First, porn is by definition art, and therefore a form of speech. Second, the restrictions are based on the moral codes of certain politician's religions. This violates freedom of religion in the exact same way as forcing a person to pray to Mecca every day or not letting people eat meat on Fridays.
Definitions (narrow ones limiting scope to humans)
Art: human expression
Porn: human expression of sexuality
Ergo, porn is a functional subset of art.
thomas.wong1986 says
Porn goes back to the Stone Age. Good luck with that.
thomas.wong1986 says
That's not the point. The point is that if you can't have freedom of speech on the Internet, you can't have freedom of speech anywhere. There is absolutely no reasonable justification for the state, any state, to limit the free, non-violent speech of any two consenting adults. To do so is Un-American.
Normally, I would defend the right of people to promote things I despise, like religion, on the Internet because freedom of speech is that important. However, if freedom of religion and freedom of speech are mutually exclusive, then freedom of speech trumps freedom of religion. If the religious will not allow porn to be distributed over the Internet, then I'll define the Bible as the mother of all porn and I say we stop the distribution of that perverted text over the Internet.
And I mean that. I have never read a text as disgusting and despicable as the Bible, the pro-rape, pro-slavery, pro-genocide text from the Bronze and Iron Ages. If we're going to start banning content on the Internet, we'll start there.
leoj707 says
Actually, studies have shown that porn decreases rape, not that this matter should be relevant to a freedom of speech issue, but if anything that's a case to ban the Bible and promote porn.
I remember reading an article in which feminists from the 1970s who opposed porn on the basis that it would cause men to become sexually aggressive were interviewed and they admitted they were wrong: porn had the absolute opposite effect and caused men to not pursue women as much because porn was easier and looked better than any real woman could (photoshopping). And they complained about that!
But anyway, this isn't a pro-/anti- porn issue. It's a freedom of speech and religion issue. The threat of violence from police should not be used to jam some politician's religious beliefs down my throat. And when you make something a law, you ultimately back it up with death and the threat of death as soon as the law is enforced by police. And that's pretty fucked up.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Dan8267 says
All laws are an imposition of someone's morality. You have your beliefs of what is "right" and "wrong." Other people have different beliefs.
There's no way to prove who is correct, so it just boils down to raw power (might makes right).
Follow
Befriend (12)
10 threads
3,516 comments
Oakland, CA
leo707's website
Premium
wthrfrk80 says
Some moral beliefs are exclusive to the dogma of a religion. We as a country have chosen to us the "might" of our legal system in a way where those "morals", that come exclusively from a religious authority, can not be imposed on others.
Follow
Befriend
53 threads
658 comments
Cloud says: I have no problem with porn as long as community standards are part of the equation.
I must find this community you live in. The only porn I can find is in an age restricted store or online after age verification. Unrestricted porn community? I'm in!
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,688 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
wthrfrk80 says
Incorrect. The basis of laws are rights not morality. You may not infringe upon someone else's rights including:
1. Murder - the right to live.
2. Theft - the right to property.
3. Rape - the right to choose one's sexual partners.
4. Vandalism - the right to property.
5. Assault - the right to one's own body.
6. Kidnapping - the right to freedom.
7. False Imprisonment - the right to freedom.
8. Perjury - the right to a fair trial.
Every law should be based on protecting a right. If it is not, the law should not exist. Morality has nothing to do with this and neither does religion.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,688 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
Huntington Moneyworth III, Esq says
You mean like the orgies of the 1970s?
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Dan8267 says
Not all people believe that. Why are you correct? Can you run some experiment to prove that these rights exist?
If not, you are just expressing your opinion, which is no better than anyone else's.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,688 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
Rights are freedoms that are protected by the state. As such, society creates rights. The rights I listed above are pretty much accepted by everyone in our society.
But, of course, your opinion counts. Which of the above rights would you like to see removed and why?
In any case, the point is that laws should only be based on protecting rights not forcing one person's arbitrary religious moral code onto another. But if you disagree, there are many countries in the Middle East that would be better at accommodating you than the U.S.
wthrfrk80 says
I'm certainly advocating a political philosophy -- one that separates Western culture from the Middle East butcher states where women are killed by those "honor killings" you mentioned when you said "Therefore being a Christaian nation means we are much much more civilized nation." in this thread.
I think you are confusing the strengths of Western Culture with the weaknesses of Christianity.
In any case, opinions, of course, are neither right nor wrong, and nobody's is better than anyone else. That does not mean that people should propose political philosophies and discuss their merits.
The quality of life you enjoy in the United States is directly related to Western Philosophy including the absolute separation of church and state, and the justification of government's existence coming solely from society collectively protecting the rights of all individuals.
I see no reason why I should not promote this philosophy as is my right under the Constitution. You, of course, have the right to argue against Western Philosophy, but the empirical evidence leads one to believe that all the good places to live are those that have adopted this philosophy -- except of course for the ruling 1% that gets to rape and pillage in other societies.
Feel free to argue that the United States should be run like Saudi Arabia or Iraq. I don't think you'll convince too many people here, especially not the women.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Dan8267 says
I never said that. That was thomas.wong1986. Get your facts straight.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,616 comments
Cloud says
The answer is--who cares? Nobody is advocating forcing children to watch porn for hours on end.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Dan8267 says
Again, that's just your opinion. Not everyone agrees with you. Why are you forcing YOUR arbitrary political philosophy onto another?
Your constant assertions that everyone must agree with you seem just as "fundamentalistic" as the religious zealots you don't like. No one is a villain in his own eyes.
For what it's worth, I agree with you about your list of "rights." Most people probably do, at least in the USA.
Are you saying rights come from whatever the majority defines as rights? What if 51% decides it's their "right" to enslave the 49%? Or the 90% to the 10%? Attitudes and opinions are constantly changing.
And, by the way, I'm not advocating Christianity. I have a thread that says "Christianity is self-refuting" in the Religion forum.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,688 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
wthrfrk80 says
How the fuck am I forcing anything on anyone? Do I have some magical fiat power that I was unaware of?
It's Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum who are threatening to force their hypocritical moral bullshit on people. Get your story straight.
wthrfrk80 says
I challenge you to find a single instance on all of Patrick.net where I asserted that everyone must agree with me. That's bullshit.
I argue for certain things. Just because I make a case for point x and justify it to the best of my ability does not mean I'm asserting that people must agree with my opinions. Now, it would be nice if they agreed with the facts, but that's another story.
wthrfrk80 says
No, I said that rights come from what the government, good or evil, decides to enforce as rights. We, the people, should strive that our government adopts a socially just set of rights, but that isn't always the case in history.
Depending on the government, the set of rights can be decided by a tiny minority like a king or the richest 0.1%.
wthrfrk80 says
Even if 0.1% of the people decide that slave owning is a right, they can make it so if that 0.1% holds most of the power. This is what happened in the United States before the Civil War. The vast majority of Americans did not own slaves, not even the majority of Southerners. Most were simply too poor.
The rich plantation owners owned many slaves and they made it into a right. See Dred Scott v Sanford. Like it or not, this is the way all government works. The government decides who has what rights. It's up to the people to force their government to establish a just set of rights that apply to all people. You don't get this for free, and America today is still sorely lacking.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,688 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
tatupu70 says
Spending hours a day on non-productive activities is a waste, but not necessarily harmful. There is no reason to believe that exposure to sexual activity in the form of porn or people having sex in any way, shape, or form harms a child's psyche. In tribal societies, children grow up around sexuality and their parents don't hide it. Yet the children are fine.
Now placing a child in a church for an hour a week or in a faith school for hours on end does cause severe psychological damage, including but not limited to, hallucinations (aka religious experiences), delusions, the failure to grasp reality, violent tendencies, and worse of all, a predisposition to vote Republican.
Follow
Befriend (1)
65 threads
1,209 comments
Dan8267 says
Ew! I never thought about it, I always assumed those artifacts were made by bohemian artists that were comfortable with the necked body, they ate granola and rode bikes to work. It never occurred to me, cave men were whacking off to them.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Dan8267 says
Really? That's quite a claim. Can you back that up? Or are you just putting your contempt for your fellow man (many of whom are religious) on display (again) for all to see?
Dan8267 says
Wow, I can't see why religious people would be utterly terrified of people like you...and vote against their economic interests based on that fear?
Historically, people are willing to die to defend their culture. Is this crazy? Probably. But it's human nature. Attacking someone's culture often yields the all-too-predictable result: a fierce response, sometimes violent. Like death threats.
Is it crazy to send death threats to a 16 year-old girl because of a silly prayer banner? Yep. But it's a perceived attack on the culture of that community.
If I go to the big Motorcycle Rally in Sturgis, SD I won't get up on a stage with a microphone and say, "I can't believe these stupid bikers...riding around on these silly kids' toys around the country acting like spoiled teenagers. And by the way, Harley's are for pansies." That'd be just plain stupid on my part.
Culture is the second most powerful force in the universe, after compound interest.
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,688 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
The GOP says
If you lived in a cave with no TV, no Internet, no nightclubs, no beaches, no entertainment of any sort, and there were only three hairy butch women in a 50 miles radius, what would you spend your time doing?
Follow
Befriend (16)
761 threads
7,688 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
wthrfrk80 says
hallucinations (aka religious experiences)
delusions
the failure to grasp reality
http://patrick.net/forum/?p=1179260
violent tendencies
http://patrick.net/forum/?p=1208969
wthrfrk80 says
I have contempt for religion and those who use it to further evil ends. I don't have contempt for the religious. I've gone on the record saying that Christine O'Donnell is nice, bat-shit crazy, but a nice person. I like the guy who played Jesus in Religulious. I think it's delusional, but as a person, I like him. So, no, I don't have the contempt you speak of.
However, I am getting a very strong contempt vibe from you. Is that intentional?
wthrfrk80 says
I guess you didn't figure out that part was facetious. One would think the joke would be obvious to someone with a sense of humor.
Follow
Befriend (4)
52 threads
4,416 comments
Corning, NY
Premium
Dan8267 says
I got that it was somewhat "tongue in cheek." But my point still stands.