To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 11622
11621  |  11623
Subject: 
Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 11 Jul 2001 19:34:50 GMT
Viewed: 
775 times
  
I know this was a troll, but I thought I'd bite.

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
  I think he was referring to your efforts to veer the debate
  in an attempt to make First Amendment = Child Pornography.
  Granted, there's room for a .debate there, but that's not the
  crux of the matter (nor, technically, is it a problem with
  the First Amendment--child porn is *illegal* in every state
  of the US, and just because people still do it doesn't mean
  that the First Amendment is to blame).

Why is it illegal? Is it because the majority find it offensive, or because
of the exploitation/harm to children? Perhaps both?

Certainly we tell ourselves that the children involved are deeply damaged by
the experience.  I'm not so sure that it's just our squicky puritanical
knee-jerk doing that rationalizing sometimes.  But of course it depends on what
you mean.  Child pornography, as I understand it -- in the US, can mean a
snapshot of a naken six year old playing in the sprinkler or it can mean movies
of nine year olds being raped, or of fourteen year olds having consensual sex.
So what do _you_ mean?  Or what do _we_ mean?

If no exploitation/harm
to childrenwas involved in any way, should it be available in a free
society?

I think so.  Further, I think that even _some_ degree of exploitation needs to
be tolerated.  One could make a case that prostitutes are being exploited, but
I encourage our society to legalize prostitution.  Heck, I'm being exploited by
my company, right?  Or am I exploiting them?  Or both?  So we'd need some
deeper definition of exploitation too.

Should the market be allowed to decide?

Maybe.  If there is no victim, there is no crime.

Chris



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
 
(...) A good question. If it is publically avaible it could include all 3. But I see your point. But lets leave the marginal side of kiddy porn aside for now. (...) My view would be that individuals who use this material may need help in some way. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
 
(...) A good question. If it is publically avaible it could include all 3. But I see your point. But lets leave the marginal side of kiddy porn aside for now. (...) My view would be that individuals who use this material may need help in some way. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
 
(...) Why is it illegal? Is it because the majority find it offensive, or because of the exploitation/harm to children? Perhaps both? If no exploitation/harm to childrenwas involved in any way, should it be available in a free society? Should the (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

189 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR