Should we ban pornography?

[Katzenstaat]

But the church can magically change the intention behind the texts? Lol.

That's the thing. It has, I mean why do you not think that there are, so many interpretations of the bible? I'm a baptist, and I believe in the bottom of my heart that the Pope and his church are wrong.

The point is that non-original interpretations are simply factually inaccurate. For example if you write a post and I simply claim to have the "official" interpretation of it I can easily put my words in your mouth and your actual meaning is lost.

Do you have any evidence to support your claim (i.e. The Pope has wrong interpretations)?

[Holy Tedalonia]

That's the thing. It has, I mean why do you not think that there are, so many interpretations of the bible? I'm a baptist, and I believe in the bottom of my heart that the Pope and his church are wrong.

The point is that non-original interpretations are simply factually inaccurate. For example if you write a post and I simply claim to have the "official" interpretation of it I can easily put my words in your mouth and your actual meaning is lost.

Do you have any evidence to support your claim (i.e. The Pope has wrong interpretations)?

As I said before the Bible is very vague in its meanings, and can be interpreted in many different ways. If you were to claim a 'official' interpretation I would simply laugh at you as would most christians who don't agree with that interpretation.

As much evidence as the Pope would. I don't intend to start a theological debate on this thread though, so let's try and keep it to a minimal.

[Katzenstaat]

The point is that non-original interpretations are simply factually inaccurate. For example if you write a post and I simply claim to have the "official" interpretation of it I can easily put my words in your mouth and your actual meaning is lost.

Do you have any evidence to support your claim (i.e. The Pope has wrong interpretations)?

As I said before the Bible is very vague in its meanings, and can be interpreted in many different ways. If you were to claim a 'official' interpretation I would simply laugh at you as would most christians who don't agree with that interpretation.

As much evidence as the Pope would. I don't intend to start a theological debate on this thread though, so let's try and keep it to a minimal.

Do you want me to treat your posts in the same way most Christians treat the Bible?

For example I can claim that the term "vague" in your post is superseded by someone else's post. Hence it no longer applies.. ;-)

[Holy Tedalonia]

As I said before the Bible is very vague in its meanings, and can be interpreted in many different ways. If you were to claim a 'official' interpretation I would simply laugh at you as would most christians who don't agree with that interpretation.

As much evidence as the Pope would. I don't intend to start a theological debate on this thread though, so let's try and keep it to a minimal.

Do you want me to treat your posts in the same way most Christians treat the Bible?

For example I can claim that the term "vague" in your post is superseded by someone else's post. Hence it no longer applies.. ;-)

You can claim what you want, but the reality is if that's your arguement to uphold your point than you've already lost. One can't simply argue a point and be correct, just because that point exists. No, you must find tangible evidence that creates your point.

MANY christians have fought for their theology being the correct one, and the evidence is simply to vague to really convince religions into merging or rather mending the great schism or reversing protestism/destroying catholiscism. It is simply difficult to find the right information and to prove that one way of thinking for christianity is the correct one.

Regardless since many christians oppose pornography. I will have to respectfully disagree with them. They can provide their evidence and I can provide mine, but the bible is that sort of thing that will be vague enough not to gain ground. To really change someones view is to provide logic, charisma, and display study.

[Esheaun Stroakuss]

Why on Earth would you want to ban pornography?

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

Would banning porn have an effect beyond mildly inconveniencing pornsites while they either register a new domain or find a loophole?
Either way, no, we shouldn't ban it. More dangerous things than raunchy pictures are perfectly legal to buy and sell -- hell, all you need is a cassava plant garden (the same stuff that goes into tapioca pudding) to make a cyanide factory, and I don't see those things getting banned anytime soon.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Why on Earth would you want to ban pornography?

Because ultra hard core religious nonsense.

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

Why on Earth would you want to ban pornography?

Because ultra hard core religious nonsense.

This is the end answer to 90% of "why are we considering banning X?" questions.

[Great Minarchistan]

Why on Earth would you want to ban pornography?

Apparently it is addictive and harmful to your health, although technically every thing you like is addictive and even breathing oxygen is harmful to your health.

[Esheaun Stroakuss]

Why on Earth would you want to ban pornography?

Because ultra hard core religious nonsense.

I understand that, but...why???

If you don't want to watch people have sex on film, fine. But let the rest of us do it.

[Esheaun Stroakuss]

Why on Earth would you want to ban pornography?

Apparently it is addictive and harmful to your health, although technically every thing you like is addictive and even breathing oxygen is harmful to your health.

You don't ban food if you are addicted to eating. You don't ban alcohol if you are addicted to drinking. It's all about choice and moderation.

[Great Minarchistan]

Apparently it is addictive and harmful to your health, although technically every thing you like is addictive and even breathing oxygen is harmful to your health.

You don't ban food if you are addicted to eating. You don't ban alcohol if you are addicted to drinking. It's all about choice and moderation.

Exactly, though the OP and some other people beg to differ.

[Esheaun Stroakuss]

You don't ban food if you are addicted to eating. You don't ban alcohol if you are addicted to drinking. It's all about choice and moderation.

Exactly, though the OP and some other people beg to differ.

Well, brilliant, let them pretend they don't watch rough horse porn.

[Ethel mermania]

What I do not understand is this fixation on objective moral truth. Why does anyone feel its necessary to have such a thing?

If such a thing existed it would make life much easier.


Edit: as per reppy's instructions. This is my last post on thr threadjack.

To get back on topic. Hurray for porn. It gives stupid pretty people a way to earn a decent living.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

What I do not understand is this fixation on objective moral truth. Why does anyone feel its necessary to have such a thing?

If such a thing existed it would make life much easier.


Edit: as per reppy's instructions. This is my last post on thr threadjack.

To get back on topic. Hurray for porn. It gives stupid pretty people a way to earn a decent living.

Smart people, too.

[Ethel mermania]

If such a thing existed it would make life much easier.


Edit: as per reppy's instructions. This is my last post on thr threadjack.

To get back on topic. Hurray for porn. It gives stupid pretty people a way to earn a decent living.

Smart people, too.

I sit corrected.

While I didn't mean it as a slam at the performers, porn is a way for people to make a decent living whatever their other qualifications may be.

[Katganistan]

What I do not understand is this fixation on objective moral truth. Why does anyone feel its necessary to have such a thing?

Grasping desperately at straws to feel superior when crapping on others' right by saying that the act of doing so is objectively moral?

[Ethel mermania]

What I do not understand is this fixation on objective moral truth. Why does anyone feel its necessary to have such a thing?

Grasping desperately at straws to feel superior when crapping on others' right by saying that the act of doing so is objectively moral?

Now, now, reppy asked us to end this thread jack.

I pretty much agree with you

[Socialist Union Of Deutschland]

I do not think that Pornography should be Banned.

However, I do think that it should be restricted. In terms of preventing to show Social Competition, Hyper-masculinity, Street Acts, excessive body modifications such as tattoos, piercings, or enhanced genital sizes, and using expensive stuff such as models driving expensive automobiles, or people having acts in luxurious rooms, these characteristics should be banned. It promotes radical individualism, narcissism, and capitalist culture.

Pornography can be good for society, as long as it is regulated, and does not Promote Capitalist Culture. BDSM Porn, and Reverse Gangbang Porn is what I personally desire the most.

[Salandriagado]

>Atheists cannot have morality

Everybody take a shot.

I don't understand what you mean by take a shot, but you are correct in saying that atheists cannot have morality (as in, claim object moral truths).

You created the illusion of a moral truth, which is quite different from there actually being a moral truth. This is little more than projection of the failings of your logic onto atheists.

Moral truths are not illusions.

There is no moral truth. That's just a fact. This universe does not have an atom of good any more than it has a joule of evil. Morality is entirely a make belief human construct that we have invented for the purpose of having ordered groups that cooperate and don't collapse into infighting. Therefore moral truth is what ever works to achieve this goal for the group in question.

Perfect description of the atheist moral view.

Since you're repeating yourself, I'll just repeat... okay, not myself, but somebody else who beat me to the punch:

From an atheist POV, there is no object morality, so there is also nothing wrong with lawmakers imposing religion on people.

I absolutely, categorically guarantee that your god has nothing to do with your morality.

[Katganistan]

I do not think that Pornography should be Banned.

However, I do think that it should be restricted. In terms of preventing to show Social Competition, Hyper-masculinity, Street Acts, excessive body modifications such as tattoos, piercings, or enhanced genital sizes, and using expensive stuff such as models driving expensive automobiles, or people having acts in luxurious rooms, these characteristics should be banned. It promotes radical individualism, narcissism, and capitalist culture.

Pornography can be good for society, as long as it is regulated, and does not Promote Capitalist Culture. BDSM Porn, and Reverse Gangbang Porn is what I personally desire the most.

What do tattoos and piercings have to do with porn? I see those daily on people who are most definitely not porn stars.

As for competition, hyper masculinity, and expensive stuff like luxury vehicles, sports displays those a hell of a lot more often and openly.

[Salandriagado]

Why on Earth would you want to ban pornography?

Apparently it is addictive and harmful to your health, although technically every thing you like is addictive and even breathing oxygen is harmful to your health.

Yup. This is your regularly-scheduled reminder that eating lunch is biologically addictive.

[Socialist Union Of Deutschland]

I do not think that Pornography should be Banned.

However, I do think that it should be restricted. In terms of preventing to show Social Competition, Hyper-masculinity, Street Acts, excessive body modifications such as tattoos, piercings, or enhanced genital sizes, and using expensive stuff such as models driving expensive automobiles, or people having acts in luxurious rooms, these characteristics should be banned. It promotes radical individualism, narcissism, and capitalist culture.

Pornography can be good for society, as long as it is regulated, and does not Promote Capitalist Culture. BDSM Porn, and Reverse Gangbang Porn is what I personally desire the most.

What do tattoos and piercings have to do with porn? I see those daily on people who are most definitely not porn stars.

As for competition, hyper masculinity, and expensive stuff like luxury vehicles, sports displays those a hell of a lot more often and openly.

I personally do not like excessive tattoos or piercings. It is made by the media to manipulate people into buying more, so that capitalists can make more profit. Do you really need tattoos or piercings to be happy? Do you really need higher quantities of anything to be happy? Many pornography enterprises try to teach that yes, people do need that in order to be happy. And they teach them that so they can buy more from capitalists, so that capitalists can make more money.

So if pornography does not display an excessive amount of piercings or tattoos, people will most likely less want those useless body modifications. In capitalism, people modify their bodies more due to social competition.

[The New California Republic]

I ... think that it should be restricted. In terms of preventing to show Social Competition

What do you mean? Please elaborate.

I ... think that it should be restricted. In terms of preventing to show Hyper-masculinity

What is wrong with hyper-masculinity? I really don't see the issue with it...

I ... think that it should be restricted. In terms of preventing to show Street Acts

But that would likely be covered under existing public indecency laws in most countries anyway...

I ... think that it should be restricted. In terms of preventing to show excessive body modifications such as tattoos, piercings, or enhanced genital sizes

What is wrong with porn actors with tattoos and piercings? Again, I really don't understand the issue that you have with them. As far as "enhanced genital sizes" go, as long as everyone involved consents, then what is the problem?

I ... think that it should be restricted. In terms of preventing to show using expensive stuff such as models driving expensive automobiles, or people having acts in luxurious rooms, these characteristics should be banned.

Where do you draw the line in terms of "expensive" and "luxury"? Those terms are both relative. What I find expensive and luxurious wouldn't necessarily be so for others...

It promotes radical individualism, narcissism, and capitalist culture.

That is very debatable.

BDSM Porn, and Reverse Gangbang Porn is what I personally desire the most.

So you dislike those other kinds of porn listed above, but BDSM and gangbang porn are OK? How do you come to that conclusion? Just because you personally like them they are automatically OK? It seems a bit hypocritical to say that tattoos are not allowed, but BDSM and gangbang porn are OK. That is like saying it is not OK to steal a loaf of bread, but it is OK to rob a bank, there is some kind of strange moral inversion at work here...

[Katganistan]

I personally do not like excessive tattoos or piercings. It is made by the media to manipulate people into buying more, so that capitalists can make more profit.

That must be why it's difficult to get a job with visible tattoos in many places. Darn those capitalists getting people to buy them so they can't make them more money!


Or it could be a personal choice, from a variety of cultures, that have to do with one's personal identity.

Your personal preference isn't relevant to people's wish to decorate their bodies, nor is the practice driven by the porn industry.