My city hates porn and I hate my city.

[Journia]

if raping is outlawed only outlaws will rape !!! think about it men

*Smokes his weed and coughs*
Dude, that's sooooo deep! And just think, Criminals and Outlaws will be as one when they criminalize crimes and shit...*blows smoke ring* Skiddaly bop dip de bam...

 

[jts963]

I see the Crusaders are out with their bullshit lies about how porn causes crime.

Chew on this, thumpers! (btw, why are YOU HYPOCRITES hanging around this site if you're so anti-porn??)


Porn DECREASES CRIME vs. FBI's Porn Squad

Since it's won the War on Drugs and has just about won the War on Terror, the Bush administration has officially declared a War on Pornography.

The FBI has been instructed to divert agents and support staff into a special anti-obscenity squad, which will gather evidence against "manufacturers and purveyors" of pornography–made by grown-ups, for grown-ups, featuring grown-ups. Otherwise known as Your Legal Entertainment.

The Bureau's Washington Field Office describes this initiative as "one of the top priorities" of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. In all fairness, we should note that "Congress has directed the Department to focus on other priorities [besides terrorism], such as obscenity," according to Justice Department press secretary Brian Roehrkasse. Sure--every hour the FBI spends looking at Jenna Jameson is an hour less they can chase down Congressional campaign bribes and ethical violations.

Anti-porn advocates use the tired old Big Lie that the government should crack down because pornography can turn people into sexual predators. But the science--not that the Bush Administration or so-called "morality" groups have any use for science--clearly contradicts this fear.

In a 1991 study, Dr. Berl Kutchinsky of the University of Copenhagen showed increased access to porn did not lead to increased sex crimes in the United States, Denmark, Sweden and West Germany. Eight years later, a lengthy paper by Dr. Milton Diamond of the University of Hawaii Medical School validated that study. "It is clear from our data that a massive increase in available pornography in Japan has been correlated with a dramatic decrease in sexual crimes," he said.

If porn use created sexual predators, the U.S. would have tens of millions of them, and they'd be easy to identify. According to the FBI, we don't, and they aren't.

The anti-porn movement isn't about crime, or "the children," or those poor exploited actresses. For the religious Right, it's about sex: sex for pleasure, sex for money, sex as a way of exploring the world or affirming your personhood. And they want it stopped.

If the FBI fired every one of its officers who uses porn at home, it could no longer function. Until Congress is ready to mandate that, it should leave the rest of America's 50 million porn users alone.

"Reprinted from Sexual Intelligence, © Marty Klein, Ph.D. (www.SexEd.org)."

http://www.libchrist.com/New2004-5/porndecreasescrime.html

 

[Mercury1]

Excuse the pun, but amen, Jimmy! That is the main reason why I stopped going to church.

Also; saying that porn leads to sex crimes is almost as silly as saying lax gun laws leads to more shooting crimes. Illegal or not, people are going to do it. In Canada, we have very strict gun laws, but you still hear/read about school shootings, death by guns, etc. The only difference between what is legal and what isn't is discretion. If porn becomes illegal, people are still going to do/buy it. At least if it's monitored (as in papered windows, only 18+ year old allowed, in the privacy of your own home, etc), it hurts less people, especially your own personal freedoms!

 

[melanie2]

damn it Jimmy the James man...you said what i wanted to say but well couldn't lol...that's my thoughts exactly...i'm so proud of you...

 

[Dr. Bill Kobb]

Yeah, when churches start getting involved directly in lawmaking, that's breaking that whole separation of church & state-thing(as they have been increasingly of recent years), it's time to tax their asses.

 

[jts963]

Yeah, when churches start getting involved directly in lawmaking, that's breaking that whole separation of church & state-thing(as they have been increasingly of recent years), it's time to tax their asses.

It was time to start taxing their asses way back when they first started being politicians. Advocating social policy is one thing, campaigning for candidates is something entirely different.

I don't care if they're liberal or conservative, make their asses PAY like every other lobbyist.

 

[Dr. Bill Kobb]

It was time to start taxing their asses way back when they first started being politicians. Advocating social policy is one thing, campaigning for candidates is something entirely different.

I don't care if they're liberal or conservative, make their asses PAY like every other lobbyist.

Amen to THAT! 😎

 

[mdizzle]

I am a strong believer in strong state and local governments. The small town I live in kicked a porn store out. I was behind them 100% even though I love my porn 😀. If the majority of the people don't want something, then they have the right to keep it out. That's how shit should work.

 

[Mercury1]

So what would happen if the majority of people want this site banned? We're not hurting anyone. We don't advertise our presence on TV or whatever. We abide by the laws put in place (only 18+ allowed, both to join and what gets posted) and I have yet to hear about any sexual offence committed because someone saw this site.

So what if most people said "Out with TT!" Would you still be behind it 100%?

 

[poppameth1]

I am a strong believer in strong state and local governments. The small town I live in kicked a porn store out. I was behind them 100% even though I love my porn 😀. If the majority of the people don't want something, then they have the right to keep it out. That's how shit should work.

The problem is, it wasn't the majority of people that caused this. It was one small group that had the power to do it and decided they would. The great majority of people didn't really care one way or the other. He had a large petition signed by far more people in favor of keeping the store than anyone had for getting rid of it. If you think your local government works for the people you might be in for a rude awakening.

On a related note my city council is trying to do what is known as a "corridor overlay" which is aimed at three major streets in town. They want to make everything historic looking in districts that have no historical value at all. These zones are the major commerce areas of the city. Basically, if I want to build a metal warehouse at our store here I have to brick it and plant trees and boxwood bushes. All a major expense and a lot of upkeep. It's gotten to the point where businesses are closing shop and moving to a nearby city instead of trying to deal with it. The Staunton City council can't seem to understand they are doing everything possible to drive business away from the city. After numerous meetings with them it always comes down to what "they" want, not what is best for the businesses that pay their taxes.

 

[the_jimmy_james]

I am a strong believer in strong state and local governments. The small town I live in kicked a porn store out. I was behind them 100% even though I love my porn 😀. If the majority of the people don't want something, then they have the right to keep it out. That's how shit should work.

It's a private enterprise. Running somebody out of business is racketeering. The government can be held liable for racketeering, too.

The only moral and socially responsible way to get rid of a business you don't like is with the ballot in your pocket. Cash. Vote with your dollars. If you don't want a business, don't shop at it. It's just that simple. If you don't like it, ignore it. Otherwise fuck off.

 

[jts963]

It's a private enterprise. Running somebody out of business is racketeering. The government can be held liable for racketeering, too.

The only moral and socially responsible way to get rid of a business you don't like is with the ballot in your pocket. Cash. Vote with your dollars. If you don't want a business, don't shop at it. It's just that simple. If you don't like it, ignore it. Otherwise fuck off.

I could maybe understand if this was some gawdy, in-your-face sex shop like you find in some big cities, but the proprietor is clearly trying to be discreet.

I would sue their asses silly for unlawful harassment. Let them explain to a judge how he got a business license specifying his business but why he should not be allowed to operate his business.

 

[likeasong1]

The Supreme Court ruled many years ago that (1) Obscenity is NOT protected under freedom of speech and that (2) a community standard can be set to what is and is not acceptable.

The problem with that, however, is that the definition of obscenity also includes the caveat that it is without artistic, political, or scientific merit.

Political and scientific can be proven.... but there's always artistic. Anything is art if but one person says it is. Putting it on a VHS or DVD, especially if it has any kind of plot, almost automatically makes it art. So, it's pretty impossible to declare anything obscene. Except child porn, of course, which is illegal per se.

 

[Wade1]

Sure, paint all us Christians as Bible-thumping, torch carrying fanatics. After all, that's what the drive-by media wants you to believe. All we are in reality are people concerned about our families, our kids and the overabundant sexual victimization out there.

Of course, non-Christians too are people concerned about their families, their kids and the overabundant sexual victimization out there. The salient difference isn't in the presence or absence of concern, but rather in the means employed to those ends.

 

[poppameth1]

Last I heard he is taking the case to appeals court. He has several shops in Virginia and plenty of money as a result. He'll take it to the Supreme Court if he has to, but I doubt it'll get any further than appeals where most likely the charges will be dropped.

 

[the_jimmy_james]

Of course, non-Christians too are people concerned about their families, their kids and the overabundant sexual victimization out there. The salient difference isn't in the presence or absence of concern, but rather in the means employed to those ends.

Again it comes down to "Christians vs. Non-Christians", "Conservative vs. Liberal".

Why does everything have to be this way in the modern world? I thought we'd moved past this crap. One can be a Christian and be accepting (Jesus taught this!) One can be atheist and still be an opinionated pain in the ass (Most I've found.)

I'm listening to baroque music right now. Someone's totally rocking the world on a pipe organ. I suggest that everybody find some good music, chill, and forget this issue before it descends into flamewar territory.

 

[Dr. Bill Kobb]

Again it comes down to "Christians vs. Non-Christians", "Conservative vs. Liberal".

Why does everything have to be this way in the modern world? I thought we'd moved past this crap. One can be a Christian and be accepting (Jesus taught this!) One can be atheist and still be an opinionated pain in the ass (Most I've found.)

I'm listening to baroque music right now. Someone's totally rocking the world on a pipe organ. I suggest that everybody find some good music, chill, and forget this issue before it descends into flamewar territory.

Actually, J.J., I believe Wade's post was in answer to someone who tends to always oversimplify things, aping their wingnut spin-doctor's talking points, as opposed to listening to both sides of an argument and then deciding on their own.

 

[melanie2]

Again it comes down to "Christians vs. Non-Christians", "Conservative vs. Liberal".

Why does everything have to be this way in the modern world? I thought we'd moved past this crap. One can be a Christian and be accepting (Jesus taught this!) One can be atheist and still be an opinionated pain in the ass (Most I've found.)

I'm listening to baroque music right now. Someone's totally rocking the world on a pipe organ. I suggest that everybody find some good music, chill, and forget this issue before it descends into flamewar territory.

i ask myself questions like this all the time..it's like in today's world..why is race still such an issue?

and ooooooooooooooo i love baroque music..isn't it soo crisp and clear? you haven't heard anything until you hear it on harpsichord..mmmmm

 

[the_jimmy_james]

Actually, J.J., I believe Wade's post was in answer to someone who tends to always oversimplify things, aping their wingnut spin-doctor's talking points, as opposed to listening to both sides of an argument and then deciding on their own.

Well, I didn't specify who said what. I was bemoaning the fact that it happens too often mostly. Sorry if it sounded like I was calling anybody out!

 

[Dr. Bill Kobb]

Well, I didn't specify who said what. I was bemoaning the fact that it happens too often mostly. Sorry if it sounded like I was calling anybody out!

I see. Your quoting of Wade's comments before launching into the diatribe confused me.

I know exactly what you mean, though. I have always considered myself middle-of-the-road, but the way that radio chickenhawk pundits present issues, you are either a card-carrying patriot, or a godless commie (which is in itself amusing, as these are the same people who shop at and totally believe the lies of Wal-Mart, who just happen to filter millions in ad revenue to Faux News and who also just happen to trade with who? Oh, yeah. Godless Chinese commies, instead of supporting U.S. producers).

Heck, I can even tell which radio pundit a fundie listens to by the phrases they ape. For instance, kyhawkeye is obviously a fan of bloated pig-man Rush Limbaugh, who is quite fond of the phrase "drive-by media" (his made-up derogatory reference to the newspaper trade).

 

[TheChameleon]

hey kids, keep it calm. Don't make be blow a whistle and put anybody in a timeout box. No need for calling folks out.

 

[Dr. Bill Kobb]

You mean by saying inflammatory things like FUCK WAL-MART or FUCK RUSH LIMBAUGH?

Okay, I promise I won't.

 

[Mercury1]

Again it comes down to "Christians vs. Non-Christians", "Conservative vs. Liberal".

Why does everything have to be this way in the modern world? I thought we'd moved past this crap...

You are absolutely right, JJ. This in the modern world is bull. BUT! It happens all the time. Moved past this crap? You don't seriously believe we ever moved past this? Human beings are sadistic, greedy, inhumane creatures, and so long as humans stay that way, we will never move beyond that.

You simply cannot please everyone all of the time. No matter what law gets passed, no matter what you do, someone somewhere is going to complain.

For example, if you're against porn stores that are not doing anything illegal, here's what you can do: "Oh, a porn store. I don't like that." *Continues walking* That way, the people who are abiding by the law are happy, and you are happy, as you have walked by and went about your day.

It reminds me of what happened to Married With Children. Some self-righteous woman sued them because their "obscene" content was hurting her kids. Well, lady, they invented a remote control for a reason...

 

[Cbarton]

Heck, I can even tell which radio pundit a fundie listens to by the phrases they ape. For instance, kyhawkeye is obviously a fan of bloated pig-man Rush Limbaugh, who is quite fond of the phrase "drive-by media" (his made-up derogatory reference to the newspaper trade).

Actually, Rick, I was a conservative LONG before Rush was on the air, and a decrier against the liberal media bias by the drive-b...oops, sorry for the inflammatory language, "mainstream" media since High School. I like his use of that name for them because the 'mainstream' media has a drive-by shooting-style intellect ("If it bleeds, It Leads!"). When I was in college 20+ years ago, the news talk shows on TV always teamed up 3-4 liberals vs. one conservative, claiming they were giving us 'equal time'. HAH! YEAH RIGHT. The best part usually was that the sum of the IQ of the 3 rarely matched the IQ of the one, but I digress. I'd say Rush agrees with me about 95% of the time, LOL. And, the egos of all those commentators on CNN, MSNBC, and National Propaganda..I mean Public Radio wish they had a tenth of his mind and his audience. That's where the bloated ones are...in their ego's thinking they are smarter than the public, and "they know what's best for us"...please pass me the Phenergan...

I realize my views are, sadly, in the vast minority out there. That's fine, what's right is not always popular, and what's popular is not always right. I've lived with that all my life, so why would that change here?

To those claiming that porn does not increase sex crimes, all you need to do is read the Reagan Commission on Pornography's report. 'Nuff said. And as I said, I've lived the result of it. Don't tell me MDJ's and I's experience is the exception and not the rule. We know better! We lived it!

Jimmy James, I actually agree with you on most points. People have done horrid things in the war against AND in the name of religion. That's why I'm not religious, I'm a Christian. There is a difference, as I have stated in other threads here and will not waste time repeating what the difference is. Plus, morality and government have been intertwined since the Constitution was written. As James Madison, the Father of our Constitution said, "We have staked this country's ability to survive on whether we can obey The 10 Commandments." It's just a matter of deciding what morality, what standard you are going to follow. Our fathers chose the Judeo-Christian standard. Much of the world now is entranced by the Secular-Humanist world view, and the world now suffers because of it.

 

[Celerich]

Personally, i am a Christian, and am against porn. However, my opinions are mine, not yours. If you want a porn site and it's not illegal, by all means.