STORM2K

Several serious conservative commentators like George Will have expressd their conviction that, even though they don't like it, pornography is protected by the 1st ammendment right fo free speech, excluding, of course, child pornography. Do you guys agree with Mr. Will or not?
Also, what kind of pornography should be banned? Is Playboy/Penthouse/Hustler unacceptable? Where do you draw the line?
For me, I think any pornography that depicts indecent acts should be banned. There's a difference between art and obscenity.

stuff is part of the reason why we have some many pedophiles here in this country and throughout the world!

jason0509 wrote:...pornography is protected by the 1st ammendment right fo free speech,excluding, of course, child pornography. Do you guys agree with Mr. Will or not?
Also, what kind of pornography should be banned? Is Playboy/Penthouse/Hustler unacceptable?Where do you draw the line?
For me, I think any pornography that depicts indecent acts should be banned. There's a difference between art and obscenity.

I agree...I have no desire to read or look at any of that garbage......

When I think of child pornography it makes me sick. As far as the rest of it... that is not up to me to decide. Whatever floats your boat I guess.

even though they don't like it, pornography is protected by the 1st ammendment

I don't like it, but it is one of our civil liberties. Let's not invite government censorship further into our lives.

Yes.

Why? If stuff were banned, it would not only stop me from looking at it; but it'd also force others to do the same; as well as make this country a cleaner and safer place.

I don't quite understand the appeal of watching two people have sex. IMO, pornography is just that -- video, digital, or still images of people engaged in the act. On the other hand, some magazines (Playboy, I think) do not depict people in the act. They merely show nude, sometimes suggestive, models. I prefer to see a gorgeous woman, like my boss, in her black skirt and jacket at work than to ever see her nude. It's just more appealing to me. Blah...to see a woman all spread out and gross like that. It's not "art" to me.

As for it being "freedom of speech," I think that's a bunch of malarkey. What speech? What is being spoken? That's like saying burning a flag is free speech. If you're that illiterate that you can't vocalize what you want to say and you have to burn a flag or a maybe cross, you're not speaking. Next thing you know, someone will argue that they shot someone else to "express" themselves. Actions are not speech and should not be protected as such. And pornography is not free press either. There's no news in that.

As for whether it should be banned or not, that's a whole other story. I don't like it. But I don't like hush puppies either and I'm not asking for a ban on them.

Well then I exercise my first ammendment rights for them to keep it the heck out of my inbox. Thank you very much!!

Let's think of pornography in a positive. Say there is some individual who hasn't found someone else to share, um, sexual encounters with. I'm glad that someone has a magazine and a video to watch instead of perhaps grabbing some innocent person off the street and raping them.

mrschad wrote:Let's think of pornography in a positive. Say there is some individual who hasn't found someone else to share, um, sexual encounters with. I'm glad that someone has a magazine and a video to watch instead of perhaps grabbing some innocent person off the street and raping them.

The problem is that a pedophile could use that argument also and try to make us think of child pornography in a positive light. If they don't have a child to share...yuck, yuck, yuck...not even gonna type it, than is it better for them to have an image or video of a naked child so that they don't go out and attack one off the street?

Two different issues here. Pornography is protected under the first amendment (freedom of speech). Child pornography is banned under the law in the United States - however, in many countries, it is legal.

I know it's two different issues. But child molestors and pornographers are mentally ill. They try to rationalize any way they can. You can tell them it's illegal, but that won't stop them from thinking they're justified because of their own needs or greed.

Heck, I'm surprised no one has tried to kill or molest children in the name of their freedom of religion.

Let me ask this.. Why does pornography bother you? I dont watch it, and you dont watch it.. So why would it matter if others watch it? and why should you/we be able to stop others from video taping sexual acts? I think Surgery is nasty, but yet that gets vidoe taped.. Should that be ilegal?

Child pornography is an absolute disgrace. But adult pornography should not be illegal.

Pornography, etc., doesn't do anything for the betterment of society.

In the case of currently legal pornography, it is up to the individual to decide what to look at.

stormchazer wrote:In the case of currently legal pornography, it is up to the individual to decide what to look at.

Guess they have nothing better to do with their time...

Skywatch_NC wrote:Pornography, etc., doesn't do anything for the betterment of society.

Neither does reality TV. But some consider it entertainment. Go figure....

Anyone else care to give their definition of pornography? Like Jason asked at the beginning of the thread, what kind of pornography (besides child stuff), if any, should be banned? Is there a difference between nude models posing alone and models posing together in an act? Should one be allowed and not the other? Should only non-violent, erotic publications and videos be allowed or should that be banned?

GalvestonDuck wrote:

Skywatch_NC wrote:Pornography, etc., doesn't do anything for the betterment of society.

Neither does reality TV. But some consider it entertainment. Go figure....

Anyone else care to give their definition of pornography? Like Jason asked at the beginning of the thread, what kind of pornography (besides child stuff), if any, should be banned? Is there a difference between nude models posing alone and models posing together in an act? Should one be allowed and not the other? Should only non-violent, erotic publications and videos be allowed or should that be banned?

That's why I included the etc.,

I personally don't see anything wrong with 2 consenting adults (or singles for that matter), partaking in some udult literature or movies.

I agree 100% with mrschad on this.