Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 19, 2014, 10:52:26 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Political Debate (Moderator: Beet)
| | |-+  PORNOGRAPHY
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: PORNOGRAPHY  (Read 29835 times)
JOEBIALEK
Rookie
*
Posts: 37


View Profile
« on: December 20, 2003, 06:58:23 pm »
Ignore

On this 50th anniversary of Playboy Magazine, perhaps a discussion of pornography is appropriate.  Pornography is defined as
sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.  Those who promote it believe they are exercising their right from the first amendment of the United States Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The delicate question before us goes beyond the legal justification for allowing anyone to speak or write about anything they choose to.  It speaks to the moral and ethical ramifications of such an enterprise.  Our society today is inundated with references to sexuality in any medium we experience.  The often quoted justification is that "sex sells" and therefore if marketing outlets can somehow equate a material purchase with sexual gratification, then some hidden unmet need will be satisfied.  This is Freudianomics at its worst.  Sex is promoted today as a means to an end and not the expression of love between consenting adults.  Pornography portrays sex as some lustful hedonism with little regard for the potential outcome of such an experience.  Still, millions of people purchase it for their own sexual stimulation.  They believe that since those being filmed are consenting adults there is no harm to anyone.  Assuming there is mutual consent among the actors, what is the difference between paying them to have sex with each other and paying a prostitute to have sex with you?  Whether you favor or oppose pornography, it is this country's obsession with sex that is the root of the problem and the unfortunate consequences it produces.   Until we as a nation can collectively mature out of this sexual pre-occupation we will be trapped in our own national adolescence.

Logged
Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon
htmldon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8893
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -2.26

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2003, 07:48:16 pm »
Ignore

Uh... ok.

Happy birthday Playboy!  WOOHOO!
Logged
CHRISTOPHER MICHAE
Guest
« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2003, 08:09:23 pm »

On this 50th anniversary of Playboy Magazine, perhaps a discussion of pornography is appropriate.  Pornography is defined as
sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.  Those who promote it believe they are exercising their right from the first amendment of the United States Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The delicate question before us goes beyond the legal justification for allowing anyone to speak or write about anything they choose to.  It speaks to the moral and ethical ramifications of such an enterprise.  Our society today is inundated with references to sexuality in any medium we experience.  The often quoted justification is that "sex sells" and therefore if marketing outlets can somehow equate a material purchase with sexual gratification, then some hidden unmet need will be satisfied.  This is Freudianomics at its worst.  Sex is promoted today as a means to an end and not the expression of love between consenting adults.  Pornography portrays sex as some lustful hedonism with little regard for the potential outcome of such an experience.  Still, millions of people purchase it for their own sexual stimulation.  They believe that since those being filmed are consenting adults there is no harm to anyone.  Assuming there is mutual consent among the actors, what is the difference between paying them to have sex with each other and paying a prostitute to have sex with you?  Whether you favor or oppose pornography, it is this country's obsession with sex that is the root of the problem and the unfortunate consequences it produces.   Until we as a nation can collectively mature out of this sexual pre-occupation we will be trapped in our own national adolescence.


There are pros and cons to your argument, as with any argumentatio/persuasion issue. Are you referring to the population explosion when you speak of the "root of the problem?" You refer to Freudanomics, I and anyone can get all the porn we want off the internet for free. Not all websites cost money.  I find myself trapped in my Adolescent urges. The true root of the problem, my friend, is the existence of Evil and all its SIN that TEMPTS US. There is a DEVIL, SATAN, LUCIFER. He has two favorite things by which he likes to tempt us with: Musical Lyrics and Sex. Then, money, money, money. There are 7 Deadly Sins the Holy Bible speaks of. I have already experienced a number of them.
Logged
Demrepdan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1320


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 20, 2003, 11:18:06 pm »
Ignore

What the HELL does this topic have to do with the 2004 Presidential Election? Have they found nude pictures of Howard Dean or something?
Logged

Moderately-Liberal Progressive Populist Libertarian Democrat.
CHRISTOPHER MICHAE
Guest
« Reply #4 on: December 20, 2003, 11:26:19 pm »

What the HELL does this topic have to do with the 2004 Presidential Election? Have they found nude pictures of Howard Dean or something?
Yeah, Dean and Al gettin' down in Harlem or Harum!
I agree it really belongs under General Discussion.
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1898


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 21, 2003, 01:23:01 am »
Ignore

So that's why he is not releasing those VT Gov Documents!! Smiley Smiley

What the HELL does this topic have to do with the 2004 Presidential Election? Have they found nude pictures of Howard Dean or something?
Logged

Currently in Iraq, risking my butt to protect yours!

Republicans think every day is July 4, Democarts think every day is April 15
President Reagan

Well I can hear you and soon the whole world will hear all of us. President George Bush
© tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35870
United States


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: December 21, 2003, 08:04:21 am »
Ignore

So that's why he is not releasing those VT Gov Documents!! Smiley Smiley

What the HELL does this topic have to do with the 2004 Presidential Election? Have they found nude pictures of Howard Dean or something?
Haha....
Logged

in a mirror, dimly lit
migrendel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1681
Italy


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: December 21, 2003, 12:34:17 pm »
Ignore

Pornography is really an issue which continues to baffle legal analysis. The future of the First Amendment may be partially defined by the doctrine of obscenity. I suppose the best way to confront it is to view it from the perspective of the test to define something as obscene, the Brennan doctrine, as articulated in Fanny Hill v. Massachusetts. In this case, John Cleland's 1749 novel, Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure, a landmark of British literature, was found unfit for readership in the Commonwealth. It was contended that it was nothing more than well-written pornography. The Supreme Court refused to allow the ban to continue. It is very hard to quibble with a decision freeing an acknowledged work of literature from censorship, but the test used to free it was objectionable. The test delineated three criteria used to determine whether something was obscene. It had to (a) be utterly without redeeming social, literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (b) be patently offensive and (c) appeal to a prurient interest. This is different from the even more repressive common law obscenity doctrine in Regina v. Hicklin, but still in conflict with a free society. Utterly without value. Clearly harsh words for anyone to attach to a work of literature. But they have been considered germane to brilliant literature. For example, James Joyce's Ulysses was found obscene by several Massachusetts courts in the 1920s and 1930s. It took a judge of truly cosmopolitan outlook, James Munro Woolsey, to free it from the constraints of church and state, saying "nowhere do I detect the leer of a sensualist". Lady Chatterley's Lover, perhaps one of the seminal exploration of sexuality, class, and society in the canon, was supressed for many years. Unable to publish it in his native England, D.H. Lawrence had to publish the book in Italy. It was illegal to import into this country until 1960, when Judge Frederick Van Pelt Bryan found a claim of obscenity unsupportable. While Constance Chatterley's gamekeeper and lover, Oliver Mellors, does use a prepondrance of old Anglo-Saxon words in several parts of the book, they really are integral to the character's development and are an accurate reflection of the Derbyshire vernacular he speaks. Why I have chosen these two books, out of the many classic works of belles lettres that were once objected to by parochial minds, is that these two struck me as never needing to have been considered obscene, and every day they were kept from readers was a loss. I suppose the point of that lengthy analysis of the first prong of the Brennan Doctrine was to say that the books that are realized to be brilliant are found to be obscene under that same standard. While nothing stops those books from being sold in any bookshop today, there may be a case of a book that is truly remarkable but fails to gain the imprimatur of the state, and languishes until enlightened minds rescue it. What a shame if the Brennan Doctrine causes that. The second prong's problem is similar to that of the first. What can we call obscene without a fair degree of being arbitrary? For example, the FCC, in accordance with the Brennan Doctrine, found the adjective ing as in "This is so ing great." to not be repressible under the obscenity doctrine, because the use, in context, was not prurient, a condition that need be met. Congressman Doug Ose, citing the usual family friendly malarkey, is now pushing a resolution which will radically expand the concept of obscenity in broadcast media. His resolution will ban seven words or phrases, in all their grammatical forms, from the airwaves. (If you don't wish to read what will be illegal, or such words offend you, you may want to skip over the next few lines.) The words and phrases which will be banned per se are sh**t, piss, , cunt, asshole, mother er, and cock sucker. Now I don't tend to use those words. I'm not looking down on anyone who does, but it's just not my speaking style. I do however see the threat to liberty in banning them. Those words express ideas. Because of that, their place in the First Amendment is clear. I won't address the third prong in the Brennan Doctrine because its meaning is pretty self-explanatory. I would however, like to write about a narrower issue of obscenity, pornography. Pornography really does express an idea. It expresses in general, themes of eroticism and sensuality. An example of pornography might contain other themes (e.g. bondage, dominance, etc.). I could only see it is as a variant of speech that, while not exulted like the freedom of the press, should nonetheless be part of the discourse in a free society. The only way to protect this is to expand on the current protections and say that pornography should be legalized for public consumption, without the governance of obscenity laws, and the possession of pornography within the home should be protected under the right to privacy. I suppose such a change in the law would incite controversy, but it's the only way to live to those words in our founding document "...make no law... abridging the freedom of speech..."
Logged

Economic Left/Right: -10.00
Social Left/Right: -10.00

Registered in Massachusetts as a Democrat for Fantasy Elections, though now living in Rome.
Lunar
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30613
Ireland, Republic of
View Profile
« Reply #8 on: January 18, 2009, 05:47:19 am »
Ignore

Why is it that 95% (over 40 times) of the time I click on "Online Users" this thread shows up on the first page, being viewed by some Guest?


Are you "Guest" losers really searching on Google for "PORNOGRAPHY JOHN KERRY OHIO WEST VIRGINIA MARGINS OF ERROR" or something?  Can one of you endless guests explain this to me please? This is like the worst website to get turned on in the universe yet I've seen this thread viewed more than any other thread (including my awesome sig)
« Last Edit: January 18, 2009, 05:55:51 am by Lunar »Logged

this is real
Tik
ComradeCarter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5042
United States


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: January 18, 2009, 10:58:08 am »
Ignore

If you bother to read migrendel's giant brick of words, you'll find some key phrases that are likely to give a wide range of wank-related search results.
Logged

I don't wanna think about it all, I'm tired.
Matt Damon™
donut4mccain
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2472
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: January 18, 2009, 11:16:44 am »
Ignore

Playboy isn't really porn, obviously.
Go back to GBS/ADTRW/4chan already.
Logged

]On the Island of Snipers, I was born
100 Shots, 100 Hits
Lu lu la la lu~
On a mouse's eyeball LOCK ON
On your heart LOCK ON!
The man who came from the Island of Snipers
Lu lu, lu lu la la
You better run away
Sniper sniper sniper...
SOOOOGEKIIIINGUUUUU
Benwah [why on Earth do I post something] Courseyay
tsionebreicruoc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5943
France


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: January 18, 2009, 11:25:27 am »
Ignore

If you bother to read migrendel's giant brick of words, you'll find some key phrases that are likely to give a wide range of wank-related search results.

Yes, for guys who do that things on blogs or forums. Personally, when I see such bricks, I don't read. Please, be aware that when you post on a forum it's to communicate with other people, and so, get information about what are paragraphs.

Then, pornography. For teens it seems to be something fully normal. For the best things, it shows sex as a gymnastic, for the worst ones as a wild violent thing.

According to the huge thing that becomes pornography today, I really wonder on the future of sexuality...

And, yes, if Playboy is porn, it might be the lowest level of it.
Logged

14/01/2011: Tunisia!!
11/02/2011: Egypt!
20/10/2011: Libya
02/09/2013: Abandon of Syria...
...and of, well, 'all of that'...

Money became totally unfair.
Money became totally senseless.
Let's make Money totally useless...

??/??/20??: EU UU!!

Maybe a little update:

Religion Tradition is people's opium...
Hatman
EarlAW
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20960
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.97, S: -6.00


View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 18, 2009, 12:10:47 pm »
Ignore

Why is it that 95% (over 40 times) of the time I click on "Online Users" this thread shows up on the first page, being viewed by some Guest?


Are you "Guest" losers really searching on Google for "PORNOGRAPHY JOHN KERRY OHIO WEST VIRGINIA MARGINS OF ERROR" or something?  Can one of you endless guests explain this to me please? This is like the worst website to get turned on in the universe yet I've seen this thread viewed more than any other thread (including my awesome sig)

Just for sh**s and giggles, I searched for those terms. Didn't get this page Sad

ETA: Holy crap, this thread has over 18,000 views
Logged

http://canadianelectionatlas.blogspot.com

Follow me on Twitter @EarlWashburn
k-onmmunist
Winston Disraeli
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11972
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: January 18, 2009, 12:13:55 pm »
Ignore

Why is it that 95% (over 40 times) of the time I click on "Online Users" this thread shows up on the first page, being viewed by some Guest?


Are you "Guest" losers really searching on Google for "PORNOGRAPHY JOHN KERRY OHIO WEST VIRGINIA MARGINS OF ERROR" or something?  Can one of you endless guests explain this to me please? This is like the worst website to get turned on in the universe yet I've seen this thread viewed more than any other thread (including my awesome sig)

Just for sh**s and giggles, I searched for those terms. Didn't get this page Sad

ETA: Holy crap, this thread has over 18,000 views

Thats.... insane.
Logged

Lunar
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30613
Ireland, Republic of
View Profile
« Reply #14 on: January 18, 2009, 03:20:48 pm »
Ignore

Why is it that 95% (over 40 times) of the time I click on "Online Users" this thread shows up on the first page, being viewed by some Guest?


Are you "Guest" losers really searching on Google for "PORNOGRAPHY JOHN KERRY OHIO WEST VIRGINIA MARGINS OF ERROR" or something?  Can one of you endless guests explain this to me please? This is like the worst website to get turned on in the universe yet I've seen this thread viewed more than any other thread (including my awesome sig)

Just for sh**s and giggles, I searched for those terms. Didn't get this page Sad

ETA: Holy crap, this thread has over 18,000 views

Thats.... insane.


SEE?!
Logged

this is real
IDS Judicial Overlord PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22616
United States


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: January 18, 2009, 03:28:25 pm »
Ignore

Why is it that 95% (over 40 times) of the time I click on "Online Users" this thread shows up on the first page, being viewed by some Guest?


Are you "Guest" losers really searching on Google for "PORNOGRAPHY JOHN KERRY OHIO WEST VIRGINIA MARGINS OF ERROR" or something?  Can one of you endless guests explain this to me please? This is like the worst website to get turned on in the universe yet I've seen this thread viewed more than any other thread (including my awesome sig)

     Yeah, I've always wondered why the googlebots were so perverted. Tongue
Logged

© tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35870
United States


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: January 18, 2009, 03:39:25 pm »
Ignore

most of the guests are robots.  a good amount of robots probably look for porn.  they get caught up here.
Logged

in a mirror, dimly lit
Nixon in '80
nixon1980
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1322
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.84, S: -5.39

View Profile
« Reply #17 on: January 18, 2009, 05:16:08 pm »
Ignore

I originally found uselectionatlas when I Googled:

"Pornography" "redress of grievances" "sexual gratification" "Freudianomics"

I have very specific needs...
Logged

“Sarah Palin is the only part of the campaign that I won’t comment on publicly.” - Meghan McCain
Lunar
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30613
Ireland, Republic of
View Profile
« Reply #18 on: January 18, 2009, 06:03:24 pm »
Ignore

I originally found uselectionatlas when I Googled:

"Pornography" "redress of grievances" "sexual gratification" "Freudianomics"

I have very specific needs...

http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHMB_enUS291US304&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q="Pornography"+"redress+of+grievances"+"sexual+gratification"+"Freudianomics"


It also takes you to the forum for the Santa Cruz Sentinals and www.physicsforums.com
Logged

this is real
Lunar
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30613
Ireland, Republic of
View Profile
« Reply #19 on: January 19, 2009, 02:59:40 am »
Ignore

GUESTS ARE STILL FREQUENTLY VISITING THIS THREAD


Logged

this is real
Breaking hearts and minds
Old Europe
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6030


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2009, 08:56:16 am »
Ignore

Pictures please.
Logged
Nixon in '80
nixon1980
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1322
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.84, S: -5.39

View Profile
« Reply #21 on: January 20, 2009, 05:02:17 am »
Ignore

Pictures please.

Logged

“Sarah Palin is the only part of the campaign that I won’t comment on publicly.” - Meghan McCain
I Can't Believe It's Not Murder!
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12917


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: January 20, 2009, 10:43:04 am »
Ignore

Gee... uh....pornography....

I haven't used pornography for two weeks. It feels kinda wierd...
Logged


Effective policing requires to know when backing down is in the best interest of public safety.  By all accounts, the culture of the Ferguson Police was ignorant of that fact, and instead treated Cartman of South Park as a role model for how to be a police officer.
Earth
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2554


Political Matrix
E: -9.61, S: -9.83

View Profile
« Reply #23 on: January 24, 2009, 11:12:22 pm »
Ignore

...

The delicate question before us goes beyond the legal justification for allowing anyone to speak or write about anything they choose to.  It speaks to the moral and ethical ramifications of such an enterprise.

Which are?


... Sex is promoted today as a means to an end and not the expression of love between consenting adults. 

Who's to base what sex should be? Religious institutions? The government? I don't see the need to see sex as purely an "expression of love" to be the only valid one.

Pornography portrays sex as some lustful hedonism with little regard for the potential outcome of such an experience.  Still, millions of people purchase it for their own sexual stimulation.  They believe that since those being filmed are consenting adults there is no harm to anyone.

Implied in your wording is the idea there is harm due to that perception. What is it?


Assuming there is mutual consent among the actors, what is the difference between paying them to have sex with each other and paying a prostitute to have sex with you?

What does it matter?


Whether you favor or oppose pornography, it is this country's obsession with sex that is the root of the problem and the unfortunate consequences it produces.   Until we as a nation can collectively mature out of this sexual pre-occupation we will be trapped in our own national adolescence.

What problem, specifically? Nations have nothing to do with it, biology does.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2009, 12:44:06 am by Earth »Logged

Wealth comes mostly from two sources in Western countries - either being very good at something people are willing to pay for or by working hard at becoming wealthy...
The Mikado
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14583


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: January 25, 2009, 01:59:29 am »
Ignore

Earth, the post you're arguing with is over five years old.
Logged

Snowstalker   mikado is content with only questions
23:03   Snowstalker   questions never helped anyone
23:03   Snowstalker   only answers
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines