Should there be more regulation of pornography? - Page 9 - 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 05-24-2005, 09:42 AM   #121
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 06:13 PM
Or better yet, let me put it this way. All my boyfriends have looked at porn. It has never been a problem so therefore I'm not sure at what point it becomes a problem because it hasn't gotten there yet, not even close.
__________________

__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 10:07 AM   #122
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 08:13 PM
reading NBC's and JG's posts, what i take away is that what is and what is not acceptable in regards to porn lies in the eyes of those involved in the relationship.

regulation/banning of porn is something the government has no business doing. the regulation of porn depicting clearly illegal acts -- child porn -- is something different.

i've written about this before ... what the government should do is not say, "this is how your sex life should be" but it can say "these are things that cannot be a part of your sex life because it harms other people." case in point: child porn harms children. thus it is illegal. porn addiction may harm me, it may harm my relationship, but that is my issue to deal with, not the government's.

this is where i find the slippery slope. if we're going to say that porn is unacceptable, what's next? are certain sexual positions more acceptable than others? should oral sex be illegal because it's really one person servicing the other and isn't truly unitive? there's a huge difference between making illegal behavior that harms people, and proscribing behavior the some deem acceptable.

Sen. Santorum, however, if he had his way, would absolutely seek to regulate the precise activities to be made legal within a bedroom. this, to me, is terrifying.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 10:08 AM   #123
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: 19,256
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
This is not a blame game. The question is about regulation. We tend to regulate things in a way that tend to improve health, safety and welfare of the populous. Note that little in this thread has actually specified the type of regulation that should be implimented, if any.
It was originally about regulation, yes, but then the thing was brought up about how porn ruined some girl's relationship, and that just to me sounded like there was blame being put on it.

Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Porn is not an obvious evil. It is a seductive one. And for every couple that claims porn helps there relationship, there are multiple individuals viewing porn outside the knowledge of their partner in the relationship.
I don't doubt that there have been couples that have had issues regarding porn. I know that's happened. But there've also been many who don't have issues with it, and if they don't, then great, I don't really see a need to get concerned then. Especially considering that it is their relationship, therefore, I feel I should let them worry about how much of a role porn should play in their lives. It's not my place to tell them whether they need more or less of it in their lives.

And porn is only an evil if people make it one. It's not exactly evil to the couples who have porn as part of their lives and yet still have a very healthy relationship.

If porn isn't for somebody, that's fine. That's their choice. It's funny that I even got involved in this argument, because I'm not one who looks at that stuff, personally-it's just never been my thing. But if other people do enjoy it...*Shrugs*. That's their choice, too.

Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Ask yourself this question, if you were to meet a guy and he told you that he viewed porn all the time, would it increase your comfort level about having a relationship with him?
I would have to ditto joyfulgirl and martha's replies to this one. If my boyfriend were to look at the stuff on occasion on his own time, I don't really care. Especially considering that while I personally wouldn't be one to look at porn, I'd still have my own fantasies and all that about certain people-celebrities and such, for instance, so to condemn him for being interested in something sexual when I'd have my own interests along that line would seem rather hypocritical of me, would it not?

Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
What would your reaction be if your daughter's boyfriend made the same comment?
As long as I know that the guy would love my daughter with all his heart, would treat her with the utmost respect and care, that's all I need to know. As long as that's very apparent, what he does on his own time is his choice. And if my daughter ever happened to become bothered by his interest in porn and stuff like that, I trust she would tell me, and then things could be dealt with from there.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now  
Old 05-24-2005, 10:09 AM   #124
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: 19,256
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
reading NBC's and JG's posts, what i take away is that what is and what is not acceptable in regards to porn lies in the eyes of those involved in the relationship.

regulation/banning of porn is something the government has no business doing. the regulation of porn depicting clearly illegal acts -- child porn -- is something different.

i've written about this before ... what the government should do is not say, "this is how your sex life should be" but it can say "these are things that cannot be a part of your sex life because it harms other people." case in point: child porn harms children. thus it is illegal. porn addiction may harm me, it may harm my relationship, but that is my issue to deal with, not the government's.

this is where i find the slippery slope. if we're going to say that porn is unacceptable, what's next? are certain sexual positions more acceptable than others? should oral sex be illegal because it's really one person servicing the other and isn't truly unitive? there's a huge difference between making illegal behavior that harms people, and proscribing behavior the some deem acceptable.

Sen. Santorum, however, if he had his way, would absolutely seek to regulate the precise activities to be made legal within a bedroom. this, to me, is terrifying.
. Exactly. Well said.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now  
Old 05-24-2005, 10:16 AM   #125
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 09:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
reading NBC's and JG's posts, what i take away is that what is and what is not acceptable in regards to porn lies in the eyes of those involved in the relationship.

regulation/banning of porn is something the government has no business doing. the regulation of porn depicting clearly illegal acts -- child porn -- is something different.

i've written about this before ... what the government should do is not say, "this is how your sex life should be" but it can say "these are things that cannot be a part of your sex life because it harms other people." case in point: child porn harms children. thus it is illegal. porn addiction may harm me, it may harm my relationship, but that is my issue to deal with, not the government's.

this is where i find the slippery slope. if we're going to say that porn is unacceptable, what's next? are certain sexual positions more acceptable than others? should oral sex be illegal because it's really one person servicing the other and isn't truly unitive? there's a huge difference between making illegal behavior that harms people, and proscribing behavior the some deem acceptable.

Sen. Santorum, however, if he had his way, would absolutely seek to regulate the precise activities to be made legal within a bedroom. this, to me, is terrifying.


Regardless of anyone's personal feelings on porn, porn that depicts consenting adults performing legal acts shouldn't be illegal.

The emphasis added to Irvine's post above is mine, because that's exactly what I feel about it. I realize that the way I see porn is not how everyone sees it, and it's none of my business if singles or couples use it in the privacy of their own homes for their own enjoyment--again, as long as it only involves legally consenting grownups.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 10:22 AM   #126
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by pax




Regardless of anyone's personal feelings on porn, porn that depicts consenting adults performing legal acts shouldn't be illegal.

The emphasis added to Irvine's post above is mine, because that's exactly what I feel about it. I realize that the way I see porn is not how everyone sees it, and it's none of my business if singles or couples use it in the privacy of their own homes for their own enjoyment--again, as long as it only involves legally consenting grownups.


absolutely.

if you are uncomfortable with porn, you have every right to tell your boyfriend that, and if you catch him with porn, then he has violated a "rule" -- the important part of that being a "rule" that you two have created for yourselfs, not a rule that comes from the government or the Bible. if you want to base the "rules" of your relationship on the Bible, fine, but you cannot expect others to do the same, nor can you condemn those who don't.

let me flip this on it's head for a moment -- if i had a boyfriend and i found him with a Playboy, it would give me pause, more pause than if i found him with S&M/B&D porn or something a bit more on the edge. why? because it would then occur to me that he wasn't being totally honest -- is he really gay? would he leave me for a woman? is he looking for a three-way with a woman? (and that's something i probably would not be willing to do). this would necessitate a big discussion and a re-evaluation of the relationship because it should be built, at it's core, upon a foundation of same-sex attraction (not necessarily exclusive, but i'd give more pause to becoming seriously invovled with a bisexual than a gay man).
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 09:19 PM   #127
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by pax
The emphasis added to Irvine's post above is mine, because that's exactly what I feel about it. I realize that the way I see porn is not how everyone sees it, and it's none of my business if singles or couples use it in the privacy of their own homes for their own enjoyment--again, as long as it only involves legally consenting grownups.
Look at the body of activities or materials that are currently regulated. Are there not plenty of things that individuals may judge as appropriate where society still says "no"?

And on what principle do we include/exclude the regulation?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 05-25-2005, 03:14 AM   #128
New Yorker
 
the soul waits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: belgium
Posts: 2,528
Local Time: 03:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




i don't understand -- i've gone through the thread and i don't see where i said any of the above.

i never equte sex with love, but i do think that sex is best with love. i also wonder what a gay person is to do, since certain lines of thought say that you can't have sex until you're married but that gay people can't get married.

but, hey, so long as we're a threat to Rick Santorum's marriage, as he told the NY Times, then i'm happy to be gay.
Hi Irvine,
I'm guessing that I misunderstood what you said in this post:
"isn't love a necessity? isn't sex, at it's best, the physical expression of romantic love? "
__________________
the soul waits is offline  
Old 05-25-2005, 07:08 AM   #129
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Look at the body of activities or materials that are currently regulated. Are there not plenty of things that individuals may judge as appropriate where society still says "no"?

And on what principle do we include/exclude the regulation?


when you can prove a direct correlatory to physical harm to another person.

you can drink, but you can't drink and drive.

you can smoke, but you can't smoke in enclosed areas as much anymore (2nd hand smoke).

guns are tougher ... and i think we can agree that, since the purpose of a gun is to kill, it must be treated differently than drinking and cigarettes.

please show me where the use of pornography can result in the death of another person, or the eventual physical destruction of the body as seen in other vices (alcohol, cigarettes) and then you might have a case.

also, somethings are illegal purely due to custom -- i.e., marijuana -- when it is, in fact, far less harmful to the body than cigarettes or alcohol.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-25-2005, 07:33 AM   #130
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511


also, somethings are illegal purely due to custom -- i.e., marijuana -- when it is, in fact, far less harmful to the body than cigarettes or alcohol.
Marijuana is not illegal due to "custom". While marijuana may nto have the same effects on your own body as cigarettes do, no one's gonna get high after smoking a few regular cigarettes then try to drive a car and wind up kilingl someone.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-25-2005, 07:48 AM   #131
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Porn is already strictly regulated.

No, America is just obsessed. They pass a law? It's never "enough." No, now we've got to pass "new laws"? Sorry...pornography is already strictly regulated. Guaranteed, though, if a new "stricter" law was passed, it would never be "enough." How could Christians cry "moral decay" otherwise?

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-25-2005, 08:13 AM   #132
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 06:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Marijuana is not illegal due to "custom". While marijuana may nto have the same effects on your own body as cigarettes do, no one's gonna get high after smoking a few regular cigarettes then try to drive a car and wind up kilingl someone.
Not true. Many studies have shown marijuana has little effect on driving except when alcohol was also involved. Fatigue is the number one cause of fatal accidents, followed by alcohol, with drugs third. In some studies marijuana drivers were shown to actually be safer drivers than than non-drug users.

Not to hijack this thread but I couldn't let that one go.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 05-25-2005, 08:41 AM   #133
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by joyfulgirl


Not true. Many studies have shown marijuana has little effect on driving except when alcohol was also involved. Fatigue is the number one cause of fatal accidents, followed by alcohol, with drugs third. In some studies marijuana drivers were shown to actually be safer drivers than than non-drug users.

Not to hijack this thread but I couldn't let that one go.
As you know, a variety of studies produce a variety of results. However, I have never seen a study that resulted in the idea that marijuana- high drivers perform better than non-high drivers.

Here's a couple of my sources:

http://www.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_Notes/...Marijuana.html

http://www.drugfreeaz.com/drug/steerclear_facts.html
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-25-2005, 08:48 AM   #134
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:13 PM
The fact that marijuana is illegal and tobacco is illegal has mostly to do with cultural history.

Prior to the invention of coffee, beer was the drink of choice. Coffee, as a stimulant, was the new "drug of choice," because it kept people awake and, at the same time, kept the Industrial Revolution going. As such, stimulants such as coffee and tobacco became socially acceptable, because they became synonymous with being "industrious."

At the same time, beer and other alcohol became synonymous with being lazy. It would, thus, logically extend to marijuana as being a drug linked to being "lazy."

Health, honestly, has only been a peripheral part of the argument, as evidenced by the fact that tobacco, a highly carcinogenic substance, is still legal.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-25-2005, 08:51 AM   #135
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 09:13 PM
Not to mention the fact that tobacco growing is largely the province of wealthy white men, whereas marijuana is so easy to grow that it's a very democratic plant--i.e. not as much profit potential for Big Tobacco.
__________________

__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax 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 08:13 PM.


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