NATION

PASSWORD

"Child Porn"

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12945
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Araraukar » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:27 am

As far as the law goes, it doesn't matter if the picture was generated by computer (which might be a false claim at that, an attempt to avoid jail time) or was taken from real life, if it's a picture of a child in a pornographic setting, it's forbidden.

Those artists should be taken out behind the shed and shot. :p

And of course their clients too. Anyone know a good hitman...? 8)
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.

User avatar
The_pantless_hero
Senator
 
Posts: 4302
Founded: Mar 19, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby The_pantless_hero » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:34 am

Araraukar wrote:As far as the law goes, it doesn't matter if the picture was generated by computer (which might be a false claim at that, an attempt to avoid jail time) or was taken from real life, if it's a picture of a child in a pornographic setting, it's forbidden.

Those artists should be taken out behind the shed and shot. :p

And of course their clients too. Anyone know a good hitman...? 8)

Remember people:
Drawing a picture of a child naked: illegal
First degree murder: ok
Bottle wrote:Equality is a slippery slope, people, and if you give it to the gays you have to give it to the polygamists and if you give it to the polygamists you have to give it to the serial dog molesters and if you give it to the serial dog molesters you have to give it to the machine fetishists and the next thing you know you're being tied up by a trio of polygamist lesbian powerbooks and you can't get out because the safety word is case sensistive!

Doing what we must because we can

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12945
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Araraukar » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:35 am

The_pantless_hero wrote:Here is an argument you won't hear used in a realistic discussion, ever: Guns are consistently used in crimes, thus we should ban guns because they encourage and facilitate more and more violent crimes.


Well, I'd support that. :lol2:

And actually, it's not so much the gun ownership as something being mentally wrong in the whole USA - here in Finland we have TONS of guns, thanks to having an active hunting culture, but very few guns are ever used in crimes. People here seem to prefer axes and knives, if they really need to maul someone... :meh:
Last edited by Araraukar on Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12945
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Araraukar » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:35 am

The_pantless_hero wrote:Remember people:
Drawing a picture of a child naked: illegal
First degree murder: ok


Conspiracy to commit murder, not first degree, if I used a hitman. :P
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.

User avatar
Dalratha
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 14
Founded: Apr 09, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Dalratha » Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:04 am

UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:
Phenia wrote:
Of course they have "legit value" historically and culturally, and I never suggested we should ban 'anything meant to turn people on,' that's a strawman.

Your claim that such sculptures are by "original intent" porn is dubious at best, and the comparison of sculptures of Venuses to modern pornography is flawed on off-base. We're not talking about ancient museum sculptures of at best ambiguous meaning, we're talking about modern, explicit and graphic depictions of children having sex distributed to thousands and/or millions (sigh) of people for the purpose of wanking over it.

Now, one of these subjects has relevance to the topic and to modern society. The other does not. Can you guess which is which?


Yet their original purpose was to turn people on sexually. What is the definition of porn? Anything meant to turn people on sexually.
Many couples use porn to help improve their sexual relationships.
I take you are not aware that for thousands of years there have been nude depictions of people who were under the age of 18. Some of these can be seen in museums today and some are being studied.
How do you know people didn't wank over the nude sculptures of an adolescent Venus? A work's cultural value is something that has to be measured by history, not be some group's moral outrage.
Just as we study nude paintings and statues from the past, historians of the future will study today's porn to get a better overall picture of our contemporary society.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

User avatar
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
Minister
 
Posts: 3138
Founded: Nov 25, 2006
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby UnitedStatesOfAmerica- » Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:43 pm

Phenia wrote:


Measuring "cultural value," that's what history is for (according to you)?

What an irrelevant bunch of glib nonsense.
I'm quite read up on the prevaling theories.
How do you know that sculpture, which is just one of thousands, is not of an adolescent? The size of the waist? You are aware that a lot of teenage girls have big waists. The size of the breasts? Lots of teenage girls have large breasts.

Do you have anything that actually supports you?
Land of Free Beer and the Home of the Kentucky Fried Chicken

User avatar
Phenia
Senator
 
Posts: 3809
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Phenia » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:56 pm

UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:
Phenia wrote:


Measuring "cultural value," that's what history is for (according to you)?

What an irrelevant bunch of glib nonsense.
I'm quite read up on the prevaling theories.
How do you know that sculpture, which is just one of thousands, is not of an adolescent? The size of the waist? You are aware that a lot of teenage girls have big waists. The size of the breasts? Lots of teenage girls have large breasts.

Do you have anything that actually supports you?


I'm not the one making the stupid claim that these were "originally intended" to provide wanking material.

Since you're "quite well read up," you can easily cite even one source to support your claim.

Until you do, you're just blowing hot air. And the fact that you are comparing modern teenage girls with pre-historical adolescents is just one more demonstration of the sheer ignorance which apparently fuels your every word.

User avatar
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
Minister
 
Posts: 3138
Founded: Nov 25, 2006
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby UnitedStatesOfAmerica- » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:27 pm

It falls on those making the extroardinary claims to prove those claims. You've never proved yours. I'm not going to prove it for you.
Land of Free Beer and the Home of the Kentucky Fried Chicken

User avatar
Phenia
Senator
 
Posts: 3809
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Phenia » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:38 pm

UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:It falls on those making the extroardinary claims to prove those claims.


Yes indeed, and I am discussing the one you made here when you said:

You wrote:the Venuses of prehistoric times, were meant to turn people on so they would produce children



You then later repeated this (moronic) claim here:

You wrote:Yet their original purpose was to turn people on sexually.


So, by all means, feel free to back up your bullshit claims. Or don't, and you can continue to just be laughably wrong.

User avatar
New New Anarchy
Secretary
 
Posts: 30
Founded: Jun 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby New New Anarchy » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:49 pm

AHHHHHHHHHHH
Image
AHHHHHHHHHHH

Child porn is good!
Everyone hates the truth!
CP is the center of all truth!
Political Compass
Economic Left/Right: -10.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -10.00

User avatar
Domminus
Envoy
 
Posts: 338
Founded: Jun 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Domminus » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:50 pm

New New Anarchy wrote:AHHHHHHHHHHH
Image
AHHHHHHHHHHH

Child porn is good!
Everyone hates the truth!
CP is the center of all truth!


I am scarred.

User avatar
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
Minister
 
Posts: 3138
Founded: Nov 25, 2006
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby UnitedStatesOfAmerica- » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:51 pm

http://www.geocities.com/triple-moon/ar ... usfig.html


“Many scholars have assumed that figurine features such as exaggerated breasts, sexual organs, hips and buttocks allude to these objects being used to signify and encourage fertility, to represent an idea of female beauty or alternately to portray an ancient ‘Mother Goddess’ (Berenguer, 1973, cited in Dickson, 1990:102-3).”


In ancient times, as in modern times, representing female beautify often meant representing females in the nude regardless of their age. What the religious right calls porn, is the modern version of this. This form of art was never banned until religious wackjobs started burning down temples, libraries and carrying out the inquisition on anyone who wasn't Christian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurine

hundreds of similar figurines have been discovered from the Pyrenees to the plains of Siberia. They are collectively described as "Venus" figurines in reference to the Roman goddess of beauty, Venus, since the prehistorians of the early 20th century assumed they represented an ancient ideal of beauty


Depictions of beauty, whether the subject was an adult or in her teens or a child often involved depicting female and male nudity.

Archaeologists speculate, however, that they may be emblems of security and success, fertility icons, pornographic imagery, or even direct representations of a Great Goddess or Mother Goddess or various local goddesses. The female figures, as part of Upper Palaeolithic portable art, appear to have no practical use in the context of subsistence. They are mostly discovered in settlement contexts, both in open-air sites and caves; burial contexts are much more rare


Epic fail on your claim that porn is a modern phenomenon.

Some scholars and popular theorists suggest a direct continuity between the Palaeolithic female figurines and later examples of female depictions from the Neolithic or even the Bronze Age.[8] Such views have been contested on numerous grounds, not least the general absence of such depictions during the intervening Mesolithic



Porn, even CG child porn, is nothing but a continuation of a tradition dating back to the Venus figurines.

If the religious right had their way, we'd still be living in the dark ages.
Land of Free Beer and the Home of the Kentucky Fried Chicken

User avatar
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
Minister
 
Posts: 3138
Founded: Nov 25, 2006
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby UnitedStatesOfAmerica- » Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:53 pm

Phenia wrote:
UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:It falls on those making the extroardinary claims to prove those claims.


Yes indeed, and I am discussing the one you made here when you said:

You wrote:the Venuses of prehistoric times, were meant to turn people on so they would produce children



You then later repeated this (moronic) claim here:

You wrote:Yet their original purpose was to turn people on sexually.


So, by all means, feel free to back up your bullshit claims. Or don't, and you can continue to just be laughably wrong.

The moronic claim is that one that makes the unsubstantiated statement that child porn is only recent or that it has always been banned. Such attitude can only be explained by religious intolerance of non christian values or perspectives.
Land of Free Beer and the Home of the Kentucky Fried Chicken

User avatar
Phenia
Senator
 
Posts: 3809
Founded: May 06, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Phenia » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:09 pm

UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:http://www.geocities.com/triple-moon/articles/venusfig.html


“Many scholars have assumed that figurine features such as exaggerated breasts, sexual organs, hips and buttocks allude to these objects being used to signify and encourage fertility, to represent an idea of female beauty or alternately to portray an ancient ‘Mother Goddess’ (Berenguer, 1973, cited in Dickson, 1990:102-3).”


Speculation =/= fact. You stated it unequivocally what the purpose of these figurines was for, twice. It isn't unequivocal. You are wrong.

Archaeologists speculate, however, that they may be emblems of security and success, fertility icons, pornographic imagery, or even direct representations of a Great Goddess or Mother Goddess or various local goddesses. The female figures, as part of Upper Palaeolithic portable art, appear to have no practical use in the context of subsistence. They are mostly discovered in settlement contexts, both in open-air sites and caves; burial contexts are much more rare


"Speculation" again does not equal the unequivocal matter-of-fact bullshit you were spewing. Sorry.

Epic fail on your claim that porn is a modern phenomenon.


Ooh, nice strawman! You're a fount of fallacies, aren't you!

Some scholars and popular theorists suggest a direct continuity between the Palaeolithic female figurines and later examples of female depictions from the Neolithic or even the Bronze Age.[8] Such views have been contested on numerous grounds, not least the general absence of such depictions during the intervening Mesolithic



Porn, even CG child porn, is nothing but a continuation of a tradition dating back to the Venus figurines.


The Venus figurines are not children, and you won't find a single source that even "speculates" otherwise. And "speculation" that they are pornographic at all is just that - speculation. I can speculate, you can speculate, but I don't go passing my speculations off as if they were fact.

The moronic claim is that one that makes the unsubstantiated statement that child porn is only recent or that it has always been banned


Yes, that is indeed a moronic claim that your delusional thinking suggests I made.
Last edited by Phenia on Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
L3 Communications
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5150
Founded: Jun 21, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby L3 Communications » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:52 pm

Araraukar wrote:As far as the law goes, it doesn't matter if the picture was generated by computer (which might be a false claim at that, an attempt to avoid jail time) or was taken from real life, if it's a picture of a child in a pornographic setting, it's forbidden.

Those artists should be taken out behind the shed and shot. :p

And of course their clients too. Anyone know a good hitman...? 8)


:facedesk:

I hope this was a joke aimed at pointing out the ridiculousness of the portrayed argument.
The Corporate Conglomerate of L3 Communications
L3 Corporate Factbook - L3 Embassy/Consulate Programme - L3 Broadcasting Corporation - L3 Communications - Global Armaments

- Member of The Conglomerate
- Member of CAPINTERN
- Member of the IFA
Economic Tyranny/Libertarian: 7.38
Social Libertarian/Tyranny: -4.46

New Nicksyllvania wrote:WA is jew infested tyranny that does not understand freedom and 0% taxation

Lyras wrote:Thirdly, the inclusion of multiple penetration aids (such as flares, chaff, false-target balloons and lubricant)...

User avatar
Domminus
Envoy
 
Posts: 338
Founded: Jun 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Domminus » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:53 pm

L3 Communications wrote::facedesk:

I hope this was a joke aimed at pointing out the ridiculousness of the portrayed argument.


I'm never sure. This place confuses the hell out of me.

User avatar
L3 Communications
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5150
Founded: Jun 21, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby L3 Communications » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:56 pm

Domminus wrote:
L3 Communications wrote::facedesk:

I hope this was a joke aimed at pointing out the ridiculousness of the portrayed argument.


I'm never sure. This place confuses the hell out of me.


Congratulations! You've discovered the true meaning of NSG!
The Corporate Conglomerate of L3 Communications
L3 Corporate Factbook - L3 Embassy/Consulate Programme - L3 Broadcasting Corporation - L3 Communications - Global Armaments

- Member of The Conglomerate
- Member of CAPINTERN
- Member of the IFA
Economic Tyranny/Libertarian: 7.38
Social Libertarian/Tyranny: -4.46

New Nicksyllvania wrote:WA is jew infested tyranny that does not understand freedom and 0% taxation

Lyras wrote:Thirdly, the inclusion of multiple penetration aids (such as flares, chaff, false-target balloons and lubricant)...

User avatar
Domminus
Envoy
 
Posts: 338
Founded: Jun 26, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Domminus » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:58 pm

L3 Communications wrote:
Domminus wrote:
L3 Communications wrote::facedesk:

I hope this was a joke aimed at pointing out the ridiculousness of the portrayed argument.


I'm never sure. This place confuses the hell out of me.


Congratulations! You've discovered the true meaning of NSG!


Confusion?

User avatar
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
Minister
 
Posts: 3138
Founded: Nov 25, 2006
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby UnitedStatesOfAmerica- » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:20 pm

Phenia wrote:
UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:http://www.geocities.com/triple-moon/articles/venusfig.html


“Many scholars have assumed that figurine features such as exaggerated breasts, sexual organs, hips and buttocks allude to these objects being used to signify and encourage fertility, to represent an idea of female beauty or alternately to portray an ancient ‘Mother Goddess’ (Berenguer, 1973, cited in Dickson, 1990:102-3).”


Speculation =/= fact. You stated it unequivocally what the purpose of these figurines was for, twice. It isn't unequivocal. You are wrong.

Archaeologists speculate, however, that they may be emblems of security and success, fertility icons, pornographic imagery, or even direct representations of a Great Goddess or Mother Goddess or various local goddesses. The female figures, as part of Upper Palaeolithic portable art, appear to have no practical use in the context of subsistence. They are mostly discovered in settlement contexts, both in open-air sites and caves; burial contexts are much more rare


"Speculation" again does not equal the unequivocal matter-of-fact bullshit you were spewing. Sorry.

Epic fail on your claim that porn is a modern phenomenon.


Ooh, nice strawman! You're a fount of fallacies, aren't you!

Some scholars and popular theorists suggest a direct continuity between the Palaeolithic female figurines and later examples of female depictions from the Neolithic or even the Bronze Age.[8] Such views have been contested on numerous grounds, not least the general absence of such depictions during the intervening Mesolithic



Porn, even CG child porn, is nothing but a continuation of a tradition dating back to the Venus figurines.


The Venus figurines are not children, and you won't find a single source that even "speculates" otherwise. And "speculation" that they are pornographic at all is just that - speculation. I can speculate, you can speculate, but I don't go passing my speculations off as if they were fact.

The moronic claim is that one that makes the unsubstantiated statement that child porn is only recent or that it has always been banned


Yes, that is indeed a moronic claim that your delusional thinking suggests I made.

There are plenty of other examples of representations of nudity of youths.

You have no proof that the figurines were not based on adolescents. The fact is that the depiction of nude children is not a modern phenomenon. Nor was porn just invented by Hugh Hefnar. It's been around for millenia.

The only difference is that they didn't need real children to create those sculptures, figurines, or paintings. Just as no child is used in the creation of CG porn. Therefore, there are no victims.
Land of Free Beer and the Home of the Kentucky Fried Chicken

User avatar
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
Minister
 
Posts: 3138
Founded: Nov 25, 2006
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby UnitedStatesOfAmerica- » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:21 pm

Araraukar wrote:As far as the law goes, it doesn't matter if the picture was generated by computer (which might be a false claim at that, an attempt to avoid jail time) or was taken from real life, if it's a picture of a child in a pornographic setting, it's forbidden.

Those artists should be taken out behind the shed and shot. :p

And of course their clients too. Anyone know a good hitman...? 8)

According to the Supreme Court of the United States it matters a great deal. Otherwise they would not have struck the law down.
Land of Free Beer and the Home of the Kentucky Fried Chicken

User avatar
Triniteras
Diplomat
 
Posts: 667
Founded: Jan 02, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Triniteras » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:24 pm

Everything is a picture. What does it matter if it's on film or in your mind, or transferred from the picture in your mind onto paper?
What will you do when we have the technology transfer the pictures in our minds onto film?
Last edited by Triniteras on Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
L3 Communications
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5150
Founded: Jun 21, 2009
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby L3 Communications » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:30 pm

Triniteras wrote:Everything is a picture. What does it matter if it's on film or in your mind, or transferred from the picture in your mind onto paper?
What will you do when we have the technology transfer the pictures in our minds onto film?


I'd be drawing a lot of anime, most likely and making a fortune from my exquisite drawings.
The Corporate Conglomerate of L3 Communications
L3 Corporate Factbook - L3 Embassy/Consulate Programme - L3 Broadcasting Corporation - L3 Communications - Global Armaments

- Member of The Conglomerate
- Member of CAPINTERN
- Member of the IFA
Economic Tyranny/Libertarian: 7.38
Social Libertarian/Tyranny: -4.46

New Nicksyllvania wrote:WA is jew infested tyranny that does not understand freedom and 0% taxation

Lyras wrote:Thirdly, the inclusion of multiple penetration aids (such as flares, chaff, false-target balloons and lubricant)...

User avatar
Triniteras
Diplomat
 
Posts: 667
Founded: Jan 02, 2007
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Triniteras » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:32 pm

L3 Communications wrote:I'd be drawing a lot of anime, most likely and making a fortune from my exquisite drawings.

There is no contradiction with you in this, so I'm not talking to you.

User avatar
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
Minister
 
Posts: 3138
Founded: Nov 25, 2006
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby UnitedStatesOfAmerica- » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:35 pm

Check out history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of ... depictions

Among the oldest surviving examples of erotic depictions are Paleolithic cave paintings and carvings. Some of the more common images are of animals, hunting scenes and depictions of human genitalia (thought to be fertility symbols). Nude human beings with exaggerated sexual characteristics are depicted in some Paleolithic paintings and artifacts (e.g. Venus figurines).


Recently discovered cave art at Creswell Crags in England, thought to be more than 12,000 years old, includes some symbols that may be stylized versions of female genitalia...Archaeologists in Germany reported in April 2005 that they had found what they believe is a 7,200-year-old scene depicting a male figurine bending over a female figurine in a manner suggestive of sexual intercourse


explicit sexual scenes are common throughout greek and roman works.
Land of Free Beer and the Home of the Kentucky Fried Chicken

User avatar
Tiurabo
Diplomat
 
Posts: 557
Founded: Oct 31, 2008
Ex-Nation

Re: "Child Porn"

Postby Tiurabo » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:36 pm

Triniteras wrote:Everything is a picture. What does it matter if it's on film or in your mind, or transferred from the picture in your mind onto paper?
What will you do when we have the technology transfer the pictures in our minds onto film?


Well, here's where I've got to disagree, mi amigo. Whereas I agree with the 'no victim, no crime' argument for the most part, real child pornography is pretty sick. Of course, you also have to define a 'child', since I believe the age of consent could be lower without hurting anyone. As for what we do when thoughts can be put on film, well... they'll probably write more laws banning that, wont they?

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Auzkhia, Crylante, Fartsniffage, Fractalnavel, Great Algerstonia, Grinning Dragon, Jolthig, Kakazagistan, Melondonia, Novus America, Silweia, Tech Support Scammer, The Andromeda Archipelago, The Sugondes, Trace

Advertisement

Remove ads