Goodbye Free Pornsites?

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Kenazo

Originally posted by: Nik
Doesn't this go against the whole innocent until proven guilty thing? Isn't it the law's job to prove the girls are under age, not the other way around?

Wouldn't it be better to prevent crime??

That is dangerous thinking. That brings us to the whole "big brother" guilty until proven innocent "for your protection" form of government.

In this country you are innocent until proven guilty.

You make it sound like oppressive government is the only alternative to total anarchy and chaos.

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: NikI don't believe that drug abuse or prostitution has any place in a civilized, moral, ethical society. This idea may have stemmed from a religious up-bringing, but in my views have changed quite a bit and I've come to the conclusion that I still agree with that view without it having anything to do with my up-bringing. Many other non-religious folk share the same view.

What good reason can you give to criminalize a man giving a woman money and the woman using her body to provide a service to him. Is there really a difference between a massage and a hand job? When does touching go from profession to obscene?

And as far as recreational drugs is concerned, is drinking a cup of coffee in the morning to wake up reprehensible? What about taking a sleeping pill to combat jet lag? Are they really so different from someone taking a pill to make them happy? When does drug use go from civilized to immoral?

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: Gurck
I can't wait for January 2009...

Why? So we can install a fscktard from the other side of the coin?

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
That is dangerous thinking. That brings us to the whole "big brother" guilty until proven innocent "for your protection" form of government.

In this country you are innocent until proven guilty.

Not if you happen to be taking pictures with a decent-sized camera... Check out the DPReview home page; usually there's a thread in their forums about every day about someone being interrogated by the police just for taking pictures of something totally innocent and legal. I'm afraid we're already moving towards the "guilty until proven innocent" "for your protection" form of government, and too quickly.

 

[Platypus]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Kenazo

Originally posted by: Nik
Doesn't this go against the whole innocent until proven guilty thing? Isn't it the law's job to prove the girls are under age, not the other way around?

Wouldn't it be better to prevent crime??

yeap.

And we should put cameras in everyones house, car, place of work (oops already done), every stree etc to catch them.

Also i fsomeone looks as if they may or may not commit a crime arrest them to find out. Also make everything unable to be used in a crime etc.

that way we will live in a great place!

I don't know if it was done nationally, but Oregon took Sudafed and other products containing suda-whatever off the OTC market because it's used in making methamphetamine. Wow. There are way more people suffering from allergies and colds than there are meth users, but who cares! Cut off the hand to spite the face! Who cares if allergy and cold sufferers have to actually get a doctor's appointment, get a prescription, and pay more? The meth-makers now have to take an extra step in order to get their ingredients! Yay!

:roll:

Fvcking idiots.

Actually, they didn't take it off the market there. They require a picture ID in most places and keep it behind the counter. In addition, you can only purchase two boxes at a time.. I don't see a reason or need for this, but then again drug legistation is pretty laughable all around. There were multiple studies shown that most meth producers don't even use the pseudoephedrine found in products like Sudafed. There are plenty of other ways to get the precursors for methamphetamines and even if such a ban worked, it's success will be so temporary that it will hurt innocent people caught in the firepath. Phenyl-2-propanon is a good example.

Wow, a drug ban that actually does nothing but hurt innocent people?!?! HOW FRESH AND ORIGINAL!

 

[iwantanewcomputer]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: NikI don't believe that drug abuse or prostitution has any place in a civilized, moral, ethical society. This idea may have stemmed from a religious up-bringing, but in my views have changed quite a bit and I've come to the conclusion that I still agree with that view without it having anything to do with my up-bringing. Many other non-religious folk share the same view.

What good reason can you give to criminalize a man giving a woman money and the woman using her body to provide a service to him. Is there really a difference between a massage and a hand job? When does touching go from profession to obscene?
At the happy ending
And as far as recreational drugs is concerned, is drinking a cup of coffee in the morning to wake up reprehensible? What about taking a sleeping pill to combat jet lag? Are they really so different from someone taking a pill to make them happy? When does drug use go from civilized to immoral?

When it harms you or prevents you from being a productive member of society

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: Gurck
I can't wait for January 2009...

Why? So we can install a fscktard from the other side of the coin?

So we can all breathe a sigh of relief that Hillary Clinton is NOT the POTUS

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: iwantanewcomputer

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: NikI don't believe that drug abuse or prostitution has any place in a civilized, moral, ethical society. This idea may have stemmed from a religious up-bringing, but in my views have changed quite a bit and I've come to the conclusion that I still agree with that view without it having anything to do with my up-bringing. Many other non-religious folk share the same view.

What good reason can you give to criminalize a man giving a woman money and the woman using her body to provide a service to him. Is there really a difference between a massage and a hand job? When does touching go from profession to obscene?

At the happy ending - why is ejaculation something to be legislated? Barring all over your sister, why can't I ejaculate whenever and wherever I want?

And as far as recreational drugs is concerned, is drinking a cup of coffee in the morning to wake up reprehensible? What about taking a sleeping pill to combat jet lag? Are they really so different from someone taking a pill to make them happy? When does drug use go from civilized to immoral?

When it harms you or prevents you from being a productive member of society - Exactly - and I would add when it involves minors too, but there is no good reason to make them totally illegal and create a criminal underclass as a result...

 

[yllus]

I think a central issue to this debate is the way that porn distribution to the various sites is structured. You have content producers doing their thing independently and uploading the pictures to central picture set collection sites for $. Then, the porn sites that the average browser visits pays that middleman for new content and everyone is happy.

Instead of totally revamping those efforts, basically this just means that all Internet porn operators are going to move out of the continental U.S.

 

[CVSiN]

omfg...
there is 0 wrong with Prostitution.. the only thing that holds this law on the books is Americas crappy 1940s sexual Morals..

Nevada is the only progressive state in the US when it comes to this..
they regulate it and make it provide the state with revenew as well as making testing for girls and keeping them clean.

there is nothing wrong with providing Sex for money..
EVERY GIRL IS A HOOKER when it comes down to it..
you will pay in different ways.. where sometimes its dinner movies and drinks.. or when youre married and she wants that new minivan.. your paying for sex...


its all prostitution... its a victimless crime.. a good escort can make up to 500k a year... and make up to 2000+ bucks an hour for high dollar hotties... it sure as hell isnt hurting them to only have to work a few hours a week to make mroe than we make in a month..

who do you think are the guys paying those rates..
they are the lawyers, Dr.s and lawmakers, and CEOs that are paying these rates.... its not hurting them..

most of europe prostituion is legal and goverened.. the US is way behind the rest of the modern world...

Yes its known that I asscoiate with these type of people I have many good friends in this industry as well as strippers and web girls etc... Sex is a booming industry and If I was a fine girl I'd damn sure rather pose naked for 2000 bucks or bang some rich guy for 1 hour then work 60+ hours to make that same cash...

 

[Brutuskend]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth

Originally posted by: Kenazo

Originally posted by: Nik
Doesn't this go against the whole innocent until proven guilty thing? Isn't it the law's job to prove the girls are under age, not the other way around?

Wouldn't it be better to prevent crime??

Wouldn't it be better to write everyone a ticket for doing 10MPH over the speed limit?
Wouldn't it be better to search people's houses randomly to check for drugs?
...

Stay out of my house!

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: Gurck
I can't wait for January 2009...

Why? So we can install a fscktard from the other side of the coin?

There's fscktards, then there's their ruler Fscktardicus the Supreme...

 

[Iron Woode]

I take it this doesn't apply to the MILF sites?

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: Nik

That has nothing to do with it. Don't turn this into a religious debate just because you have a hair up your ass about religion. This doesn't have one thing to do with religion, so leave religion out of it.

What the hell (no pun intended) are you talking about? I don't have a "hair up my ass" about religion, and what are you doing looking up there anyway?

IMO there's no legitimate justification for not legalizing and regulating prostitution, and the world would be a safer and cleaner place if it were so. Unfortunately, as I said, this country is too dominated by Christian dogma to let that happen.

Looking up there anyway? :laugh:

I don't believe that drug abuse or prostitution has any place in a civilized, moral, ethical society. This idea may have stemmed from a religious up-bringing, but in my views have changed quite a bit and I've come to the conclusion that I still agree with that view without it having anything to do with my up-bringing. Many other non-religious folk share the same view.

The trouble is that you completely *omit* the possibility of MORALITY in your statement. For Morality to exist, there must be alternatives and there must be people capable of distinguishing between those alternatives and choosing what is right over what is wrong. In a society where you ban everything that some people deem to be immoral, you remove the *possibility* of morality.

In order for morality to exist, people must be *free* to *choose*.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Argo

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Argo

Originally posted by: Nik
Doesn't this go against the whole innocent until proven guilty thing? Isn't it the law's job to prove the girls are under age, not the other way around?

Hmm, no. By the very same logic the cops can't pull you over to check if you're drunk.

Nonsense. If a cop pulls you over to see if you're drunk you've probably given probable cause by driving eratically.

Jason

Sure, but they're rare and usually only occur at times and places where a number of abuses have been known to occur historically. It's not exactly like Red Square stuff, man

Jason
Have you ever seen a check point? They have plenty of those in NYC.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Kenazo

Originally posted by: Nik
Doesn't this go against the whole innocent until proven guilty thing? Isn't it the law's job to prove the girls are under age, not the other way around?

Wouldn't it be better to prevent crime??

That is dangerous thinking. That brings us to the whole "big brother" guilty until proven innocent "for your protection" form of government.

In this country you are innocent until proven guilty.

You make it sound like oppressive government is the only alternative to total anarchy and chaos.

For a frighteningly large number of people on this planet, and a QUICKLY growing number of them in the United States, that is *literally* the way they see things.

Jason