Should there be more regulation of pornography? - Page 13 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-26-2005, 01:42 PM   #181
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 06:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
This becomes a matter of (i) nexus and (ii) clear measurability of the harm.

With drugs, you see the needle in the arm and you see the body dead from an overdose.

With porn, the images remain with a person and they may act on them in obvious or subtle ways. Perhaps it takes a personal experience to understand the effects. Until then, we can just hope it doesn't affect us.
Regulating things where it is blatantly obvious as to what will happen anyone who uses it makes sense, because you know full well what the dangers are, and you know that everyone would get those effects.

With porn, however, everyone reacts to that differently. Some see the image and aren't turned on at all. Some see it and are. Some see it as art. Some see it as obscene (yeah, the obscenity thing's gonna be a hard sell here, 80sU2isBest, because what is obscene to one person isn't necessarily obscene to others. Some people find the Bible obscene. Would you want restrictions on the Bible because of the way some people view it?). So to regulate something that gives off different vibes to different people is a lot harder, and will be much less likely to work.

Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
Taking it away wouldn't make people want it more
The prohibition thing was pointed out-people definitely did go to great lengths to illegally obtain the stuff. Some people saw the monetary value in the stuff, and therefore would go to any lengths possible to obtain the alcohol (and killed anyone who tried to one-up them). And those who loved the drink obviously still wanted it, so they also went to great lengths to get it. And teens who were looking to rebel against their parents would obviously try and find a way to get the stuff and give it a try.

A couple more examples for you-look what happens every time a CD is banned. Sales skyrocket. Why? Because kids still find ways to get the CD, be it from a friend, a shop that didn't cave to the banning rules, nowadays kids can burn the thing off the computer, etc., etc. And for the religious folk, that apple in the garden was forbidden. And did that stop Adam and Eve? Nope.

It's been proven time and time again that people are apt to look at/watch/listen to/read/use things that are forbidden-there's a thrill there in the idea of doing something that is frowned upon by society. Especially if society never really gives a clear-cut reason as to exactly why this thing should be forbidden-not doing that just makes people even more curious. How bad exactly is this thing, anyway, they wonder. And the same thing would happen should porn be restricted or banned.

to everything Irvine and martha and joyfulgirl and them have been saying thus far. Also, a great suggestion you made there earlier, A_Wanderer .

Angela
__________________

__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 01:49 PM   #182
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:18 AM
another thing that occurred to me: since, as i understand it, many married couples use porn as something of a marital aid, something erotic, much in the way that they might use a dildo, a vibrator, warming lubrication, or anything else they enjoy to spice up their sex life.

are these, then, as harmful as porn? how would porn be different than the things listed above?

let's take the 14 year old boy, or even any single person. chances are, this person masturbates, and possibly masturbates to porn -- the porn, in this situation, being a masturbatory aid like lubrication, kleenex, or even a door with a lock on it. how is porn different from any of these things? to return to an earlier NBC example when he asked if you wanted your daughters to date a boy who had an extensive collection of porn -- would you feel the same way if he had a variety of lubricants, perhaps warming liquid, in order to aid his maturbation? would it bother you if this boy masturbated? (not that you'd ask nor would he tell you ... nor would you ask about the porn nor would he tell you ... these are things you'd have to find out on your own)
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 01:52 PM   #183
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

but you're still not answering her question.
Yes, I did. I quoted Webster's, which means that is the definition I am going by.

But really, why do I owe her an answer? She loves to whine about me, but doesn't even address it when I call her out on her hypocrisies.

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
and she's not proposing that you do anything different; you are, however, proposing that some behavior behind closed doors is better or worse than others.
She made the judgment that marriages work better when people don't adopt "rules" such as mine, about porn. That is every bit as much a judgment call as me saying that porn doesn't belong in a marriage. Frankly, I can't understand why you don't see that.

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
are you willing to say that (1) heterosexual intercourse is better than homosexual intercourse? (2) are you willing to say that sexual intercourse is better than oral sex? are you willing to say that people shouldn't kiss with any tongue?.
You asked for my opinions, so I'm giving them to you. Remember, Martha, he asked, so don't go yelling about it. These are my opinions, based on my belief/faith system.

(1)Heterosex is acceptable to God within the confines of marriage. Outside the confines of marriage it is wrong, just as gay sex is. I think that adultery is the worst.

(2)I have no opinion whatsoever on this.

(3)I have no opinion on this. I personally wouldn't do it until I knew how I felt about the person. Kissing is even serious to me, so I'm not gonna kiss unless I think I'm in love or headed that direction.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 01:58 PM   #184
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:18 AM
the questions were more rhetorical -- they were meant to point in the direction in which i feel the line of logic was heading.

but thank you for your honesty.

i'll let Martha deal with the rest, but i think there's a difference between saying that people who have rules often set themselves up to fail vs. porn has no place in a marriage.

one is clearly prohibitive and very black and white. the other is not.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:03 PM   #185
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 06:18 AM
Can I just ask a question to the general audience here? Why exactly are some people in this country so into controlling what consenting people do in the privacy of their bedroom? Maybe I'm just weird, but I've never cared about what a couple does in their bedroom, and I just don't understand why so many others do.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:06 PM   #186
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 05:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
Can I just ask a question to the general audience here? Why exactly are some people in this country so into controlling what consenting people do in the privacy of their bedroom? Maybe I'm just weird, but I've never cared about what a couple does in their bedroom, and I just don't understand why so many others do.

Angela
Please please please, someone, tell us why.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:10 PM   #187
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
the questions were more rhetorical -- they were meant to point in the direction in which i feel the line of logic was heading.

but thank you for your honesty.

i'll let Martha deal with the rest, but i think there's a difference between saying that people who have rules often set themselves up to fail vs. porn has no place in a marriage.

one is clearly prohibitive and very black and white. the other is not.
Martha said that those who set up rules -which was clearly directed at the idea of no porn in marraige (since that's what we were talking about) - "end up miserable".

You do not see that as a black and white judgment of what works and what doesn't in a marriage?
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:15 PM   #188
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
Can I just ask a question to the general audience here? Why exactly are some people in this country so into controlling what consenting people do in the privacy of their bedroom? Maybe I'm just weird, but I've never cared about what a couple does in their bedroom, and I just don't understand why so many others do.

Angela
Here's the deal...someone said that porn in marriages wasn't healthy. Someone else said it is. That's what the argument turned into,; that part wasn't about if porn should be regulated in marriages - at least for me it wasn't.

But I am still of the opinion that porn is unhealthy, especially in a marriage and that if someone truly loves and respects his wife, he will have no desire to look at other women naked.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:16 PM   #189
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
Can I just ask a question to the general audience here? Why exactly are some people in this country so into controlling what consenting people do in the privacy of their bedroom? Maybe I'm just weird, but I've never cared about what a couple does in their bedroom, and I just don't understand why so many others do.
Because the affects don't stay in the privacy of the bedroom. Ask the child of a divorced couple (where porn was a causal factor) if this was simply a matter between consenting adults.

Given the sheer volume of pornography available in our society, it is hard to believe it has no negative affects.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:19 PM   #190
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 06:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Because the affects don't stay in the privacy of the bedroom. Ask the child of a divorced couple (where porn was a causal factor) if this was simply a matter between consenting adults.
It's still a family matter. I don't know every couple who gets divorced, do I? So it didn't affect society as a whole-until a couple's consenting activities in the bedroom affect society as a whole, why should society care? If a couple is having marital problems, it is up to them and them alone to resolve them, not society.

And besides that, okay, so what of the consenting couples out there who don't have children. Why is it still your business then?

Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Given the sheer volume of pornography available in our society, it is hard to believe it has no negative affects.
Still waiting to see some good, hard proof of this. Again, porn only has negative effects if the couple make it into something negative. The porn itself is neutral.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:25 PM   #191
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:18 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


So, we should probably make guns, drugs and all those other things we don't want people to use abundantly available?

I think we would be smart enough to regulate something and educate the public as to its dangers.
Yes, now your getting it.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:27 PM   #192
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
It's still a family matter. I don't know every couple who gets divorced, do I? So it didn't affect society as a whole-until a couple's consenting activities in the bedroom affect society as a whole, why should society care? If a couple is having marital problems, it is up to them and them alone to resolve them, not society.
What!? Divorce imposes a great burden on society. We just don't want to do anything about it.


Quote:
[Originally posted by Moonlit_AngelStill waiting to see some good, hard proof of this. Again, porn only has negative effects if the couple make it into something negative. The porn itself is neutral.
Just like guns are neutral as based on your methodology of recognizing harm.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:29 PM   #193
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Martha said that those who set up rules -which was clearly directed at the idea of no porn in marraige (since that's what we were talking about) - "end up miserable".

You do not see that as a black and white judgment of what works and what doesn't in a marriage?


no, i do not.

i see a difference between setting up rules/expectations vs. the banning of something very specific like porn as two different things.

she also mentioned "end up miserable" once -- you've repeated the fact that no man who is in love with his wife would never want to see another woman naked several times.

world of difference there, in my opinion.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:32 PM   #194
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Because the affects don't stay in the privacy of the bedroom. Ask the child of a divorced couple (where porn was a causal factor) if this was simply a matter between consenting adults.

Given the sheer volume of pornography available in our society, it is hard to believe it has no negative affects.


i simply don't think people get divorced because of porn. i think people, especialy women, might want to blame that as a reason, but there are probably much deeper issues than the presence of porn.

a porn addiction, however, is different than the presence of porn -- that's more analagous to alcohol or drug addiction, and as is the case with all addiction, the substance abused is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. no one is saying that porn can't be a negative thing, but it's not porn alone that is bad, it is the abuse and misuse of porn that can be a problem.

i would also argue that more kids are affected by alcohol than by porn, more marriages end with alcohol as a factor than porn -- so should we ban alcohol?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-26-2005, 02:34 PM   #195
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Here's the deal...someone said that porn in marriages wasn't healthy. Someone else said it is. That's what the argument turned into,; that part wasn't about if porn should be regulated in marriages - at least for me it wasn't.

But I am still of the opinion that porn is unhealthy, especially in a marriage and that if someone truly loves and respects his wife, he will have no desire to look at other women naked.

and that is your opinion, and if that's what you believe and that is how you plan to live if you get married, fine by me.

the difference is, i have no problems if you want no porn in your house or never want to look at another woman naked. you, however, have problems with porn in the house of married people and with men who might want to look at Angelina Jolie naked. you are simply in no position to pass such judgements on other people, and any individual would have every right to tell you to piss off if you were to tell him that, if he really loved his wife, then he wouldn't look at Playboy.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com