Subject:
|
Re: The Lego Group will attempt to stop some "brickfilms"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 22 Dec 2001 23:57:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1160 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> Why not? It is only by exposure to all kinds of stimuli that children are
> able to understand and begin to make sense of the world around them.
Richard, do you think there are any ideas or images to which access should be
prevented or restricted? I was once offended by an afternoon TV show about
coprophilia at the perfect time for kids to come home from school and flip on
the TV. I am uneasy about my kids exposing themselves to such ideas.
> > Porn has *everything* to do with money and nothing to do with
> > creativity.
>
> This is false. Eroticism is part of what it is to be human. If you want to
> shut off that part of yourself, and close the door for your children on it
> until they are 18 -- fine, go ahead.
Is that really fine? Do we really want to stand by and allow that to happen to
some children merely because the children are genetically closer to those who
would do so than they are to us? What do you envision as the "right" place for
minors in our legal system with regard to protection and rights? These are
questions that I have not yet worked satisfactory answers out for myself.
> You are trying to squelch a perfectly
> natural, normal, and healthy human motivation -- people are sexual, they act
> on their sexuality, they create art about their sexuality, they like to
> observe other's sexuality...
>
> People are sexy. Deal.
And the real thing with this is that _people_ are sexy, not just people over
eighteen.
> You want to talk about protecting your kids, John
I want to protect kids too. But only from bad things. Not from natural and
good things. Not from themselves. Not from free expression of their needs and
desires.
> -- I want to talk about sex in public places.
You want to be in public places and talk about sex, or you want to discuss
public displays of sexuality? I think we need more of both.
> You want people to feel bad and hide normal, healthy
> expressions of their sexuality away from public view -- I want it out in the
> open because I think guilt and shame are more damaging to the human spirit
> than pouring radiactive waste on DNA.
I understand that some people are ofended by public breastfeeding too. Weird.
Chris
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
101 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
