Wow, if this is awesome-ness, then y'all are pretty far gone.
Nope, still here.
This is nonsense, not even an argument.
That would be an accurate assessment since it was just made for the lulz.
Very interesting view points. I don't understand the mentality on prostitution.
I don't understand your mentality on a lot of things either, so I guess that makes us even.
Right now many women are put in harmful situations because of it, so if we legalized it, it would solve our problems and then we could regulate it. So that now we can pay women for sex in the open and without shame, because it is perfectly legitimate and healthy behavior!!!
What's so confusing about it? Prostitution has been around longer than all of the major religions, and really the only shame I can in it is actually having to pay for sex. Then again, if you just want to get laid, it simplifies things, and if legalized with strict health codes, you probably wouldn't have to worry about catching something you'd rather not have.
A wise old scholar from centuries past (can't remember his name off the top of my head) once said, that their are two freedoms, the false one where man can do what he wants, and the true one where man does what he ought.
I disagree – that's a rather limited mindset, probably made about doing some service to the state.
I think that applies in this discussion.
No, it doesn't really justify imposing morality on others when there is no legitimate harm to the state or any individuals.
You want everyone to do what they want, as long as it doesn't "infringe on the rights of others", the problem with that is, we all have a social/societal responsibility to each other.
So what part of "don't infringe on the rights of others" wouldn't meet that?
Statistics show that children of single mothers are much more likely to involved with crime and a host of other delinquencies.
So?
A single mother usually comes from a man deciding to not be responsible and stay with his family, or his doing what he wants and not what he ought. Society receives the negative results.
Yet life goes on. Don't get me wrong, it sucks to be them, but when you have people starving in the streets or just barely a step or two above that, discussion about morality doesn't really matter all that much.
So sure, you can view pornography, and forget that it is linked to sexual crime and divorce and spousal abuse (despite what a couple of posters here have said)
Yet the porn doesn't make them do it, and most of those "studies" are done by special interest groups full of busy-bodies trying to impose their morality on everyone else because they don't like it.
So let's have prostitution, forgetting the fact that it is an easy way to spread STD's and infidelity and is dangerous to women.
And let's also not forget that legalizing it would help to alleviate both of those problems.
So let's let people do what they want out of the name of freedom and choice and let's watch as we continue to pretend that we have no responsibility or accountability to each other.
I like how doing away with stupid, paternalistic laws that serve only to oppress equates to total anarchy with some people. It's amusing that somehow allowing porn and prostitution would mean you can go out and murder people or steal from people without consequence, because God is the only authority and there are no police or courts.
I am so sorry, it is just that we were having a somewhat serious conversation when a garbage link became involved and I thought I would point out that I thought so. Didn't mean to offend with my point out the obvious.
I thought some of these links were interesting, I hope that work haha..Focus on the family had a series of articles on pornography addiction. I will continue to look for more articles.
So you basically proved my point about how some special interest groups made up of religious busy-bodies are the only ones to try to link those kinds of things with porn using unscientific means, thanks.
And some experiences from my life: I have a close childhood friend, a few years older than me who can't have a normal relationship with a woman because of his severe internet porn addiction.
Yes, and my baby nephew can't chew a steak, so we should all be forced to drink warm milk.
As an aside, has anyone ever noticed how some people always supposedly know someone personally they can use as an example in an attempt to vindicate their viewpoint?
What I speak of is true religious principle about a God and our nature and a right way of living.
And this is pretty much the reason I don't like the majority of religious people and even a good number of atheists, because they all think there is only one "right" way of living, and they are already living that "right" way.
actually if you went through all the links, many books, studies and reports are cited the tell show what pornography causes, and I found this in just 10 minutes on the internet... Something I thought was interesting though was one group was asking money from congress (a few years ago) to do a brain map study on pornography addiction. Makes me think that a lot of research simply hasn't been done yet.
No, there has been a lot of research done with the intent to justify legislating morality, but they pretty much all get outted as the unscientific bullshit that they are.
Plus I read through your links and the studies seemed to want to answer the question does porno cause rape. Well that seems kind of intuitive, If pornography caused rape, practically every man on the earth would be committing rape. Pornography addiction however is a different matter, and rape is not the only sexual crime or abuse.
There are a lot of people who want some kind of connection so they can get porn banned, whether they think it's immoral, objectifies women, or they just don't want their kiddies exposed to the evil boobies, but these people all have agendas and thus their "science" never holds up. Just as with the anti-violence nuts who want to censor video games and movies, it apparently doesn't occur to them that while there may indeed be a link, it's that a violent person may just have an interest in playing a violent game or watching a violent movie, rather they have the brain fart of a notion that playing a violent game or watching a violent movie makes normal people violent (because everyone is "normal"
). I'd say the same applies to these studies in porn, because while there may indeed be a link, it could be that a sexual deviant just has in interest in porn, not that the porn causes their sexual deviant. As for your theory on porn addiction,
any addiction will ruin a relationship, no matter what it is. And since most addictions are cause by pre-existing psychological factors, linking porn addiction to failed marriages really isn't proving anything, other than that addiction can ruin marriages if the people involved don't seek help.
so is pornography
I just mean that it is passed off as legitimate and acceptable entertainment or indulgence.
It is. Provided the people making it or featured in it aren't being exploited, I don't see what the issue is. I'd apply that to all forms of entertainment.
You obviously think it's not for you, and that's fine, but it seems like many people on your side of the fence desperately try to paint it as a "danger to society" to lend some legitimacy to your finger wagging.
I see the same nonsense going on when so-called christians in TNZ argue that homosexuality is "immoral". As if the bedroom activities of two consenting adults are any of their business.
You haven't got a leg to stand on, frankly. None of you can provide any credible
evidence to back up your assertions.
I'd add something, but really in this case I can't, other than to say:
I think what it was referring to was 60% of men who viewed pornography regularly would rape or force a woman to do something she didn't want to do if they were sure they could do so with impunity.
To me the "do so with impunity" the "or" and that they regularly view pornography, is the thing that makes it high.
No, it said 6 out of 10 men period would commit rape if there were no legal consequences. No mention of the frequency of their porn viewership (though obviously some would be involved in their view), it's just the pervasiveness of porn in society in general. Given that pervasiveness, and the fact that the majority of men would commit rape if given the chance to get away with it apparently, you'd think that rape statistics would be through the roof instead of on the decline, wouldn't you? Odd.
I can see that optimism you were crowing about earlier shining through by the way. I mean, if you think the majority of men are potential rapists just being held back by the law, I can definitely see how you'd be a glass is half full type.
Words cannot describe the awesome that post is.
Uh, I just provided links to a lot of evidence that in the very least showed that pornography has harmful effects on marital and sexual relationships, to say nothing of abuse and crime. You just don't want to see that and recognize it because then you would have to change your behavior.
It is ok, because at the end of the day, nothing said on this board will ever make any difference in the world, one way or the other.
So why are you wasting your precious time posting here with all of us heathens?
Well I don't want to get involved in the single mothers discussion, but of course there are many factors involved there.
Yeah, poverty and a lack of time the parent can spend with their child or children being the major ones. But then this subject is only a red herring to the discussion anyway, since it neither has nothing to do with the main topic, or the topics of porn and prostitution that were being discussed when you blessed us all with that little nugget.
I don't think legislation is always the answer to these problems.
The way you've been arguing with me about how you think legislating morality is just fine and dandy kind of makes me skeptical of that statement.
I mean, if you go to the extreme and say pornography is bad so you get the death penalty, I don't think that does any good.
That isn't an issue – fining and jailing people for breaking paternalistic "anti-obscenity" laws is. If the only difference between a moderate and a zealot is that the moderate doesn't want to kill people but still wants to punish them for committing a "moral" crime, then that just isn't enough of a difference.
I am talking more on grounds of principle.
As am I and everyone else who's disagreeing with you, as well as on legal and scientific grounds.
Pornography is a bad influence, does damage lives, enhances already deviant behavior,
Says you and some others pushing agendas, but none have been able to prove anything scientifically, and you haven't been able to provide information to back up this assertion from anyone who wasn't obviously just pushing an agenda.
studies and human experience prove it and yet all we do is say it is fine for adults,
That's because no study has ever proved anything you've asserted and that consenting adults should be able to do as they please in the privacy of their own home.
just don't expose it to children.
Believe it or not I would agree with that on moral grounds (shocking I'm sure) simply because kids should be kids and not have that added complication, but I doubt the sight of a naked person would do them any harm since they came out of a vagina, sucked on breasts, and have probably seen a penis whether they have one themselves or have helped to change or bath a younger male sibling.
And I know no one will agree with me but the same goes for violence and language etc. You can only view so much of something before in begins to affect you and desensitize you and in the most extreme cases give you the desire to act out whatever you saw or heard at the expense of other people.
Ironic as I already mentioned how that was
bullshit.
Should it be illegal to look at pornography, especially the hard core variety? I don't think so, but we should perhaps adopt or re-adopt the view that it is a thing to be avoided.
Which pretty much fits with the Christian ideal of still doing something they preach against, but just feeling guilt about it because they think it's wrong.
You just don't want to see that and recognize it because then you would have to change your behavior.
Excuse me? You know nothing about me or my "behaviour".
Unfortunately a lot of religious people seem to think that because you like something they think is immoral, or at least have no problem with it, then you must be an immoral person and everything you do is immoral – a very black and white mentality. It's not unique to religious people, but it's something I've observed, since there are plenty of Conservative Christian Busy-Bodies (CCBBA
) in my area.
