|
|
View Poll Results: Porn As Free Speech: Do You Agree? | |||
Yes | 3 | 18.75% | |
No | 13 | 81.25% | |
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread | Display Modes | Share |
March 17th, 2009 | #21 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 36
|
So does this include home made porn made in private between man and wife? Or porn made between two consenting adults for their own sexual pleasure? Where is the line drawn? I am a female and well will watch my own home made porno in the bedroom with my man but have no need for other porno.
|
March 17th, 2009 | #22 | |||
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: European Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Posts: 215
Blog Entries: 3
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I didn't add any provisos about "consenting adults" and "privacy" which is what most PC-Leftists use to argue in favour of porn. Even the most loathsome of Jews are free to think what they want inside their own head (this is a simple matter of practicality). Once they try to disseminate their ideas to the wider community, that's where the buck stops. That's the way I see amateur porn material also. (Incidentally the abortion debate is framed in terms of "privacy" but really it is about community values.)
__________________
I am a centrist social authoritarian.
Left: 0.51, Authoritarian: 4.96 |
|||
March 17th, 2009 | #23 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,278
|
Quote:
I dont want the same people who started the problem to "save" us. If you can ban porn as "immoral" you can ban "hate" too. Free Speech in the USA is something most White countries sadly dont have. Its hanging by a thread here. We dont need to push it over the edge What Jews make in porn is nothing compared to what they make in "legitimate business", why the interest on the national debt the Jew International bankers make each year alone dwarfs it, and do I have to even mention the tidal wave of sheckles flowing into their pockets with each "bailout"? Of course, if those pig porno princes ended up with a third eye carved in their deformed foreheads I would not lose too much sleep, but I dont look to the state as doing anything but trying to use this to extinguish "hate"
__________________
"You can check out any time you want, but you can never leave" |
|
March 17th, 2009 | #24 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,278
|
Quote:
Thats my point. The irony is that the increasing availibility of this might actually indercut the porn industry anyhow
__________________
"You can check out any time you want, but you can never leave" |
|
March 17th, 2009 | #25 | ||
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: European Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Posts: 215
Blog Entries: 3
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
I am a centrist social authoritarian.
Left: 0.51, Authoritarian: 4.96 |
||
March 17th, 2009 | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
|
my point is the image of your swarthy face would undercut the porn industry.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan |
March 17th, 2009 | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,278
|
Yeah Tinkerbelle, somehow the young hotties don't notice. But than what would you know about young hotties unless they have a sausage attached to them?
__________________
"You can check out any time you want, but you can never leave" |
March 17th, 2009 | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
|
Quote:
.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan |
|
March 18th, 2009 | #29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,278
|
Quote:
This is why the interracialist virus has been so much more virulent there despite the much smaller numbers of muds, people have a tradition of submotting to authority rather than the American revolutionary tradition, though that has been badly eroded of course
__________________
"You can check out any time you want, but you can never leave" |
|
March 18th, 2009 | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,278
|
__________________
"You can check out any time you want, but you can never leave" |
March 18th, 2009 | #31 | |||
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: European Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Posts: 215
Blog Entries: 3
|
Quote:
Quote:
The average US State is at least as race-mixed as the average European one, if not more so. Quote:
The "precedent" you speak of is only a recent invention - arising in the last 50 years or so. The right to mass porn has not protected anything worthwhile, spoken or otherwise. Forms of dissenting expression have prospered long before porn was deemed "Constitutionally protected".
__________________
I am a centrist social authoritarian.
Left: 0.51, Authoritarian: 4.96 |
|||
March 18th, 2009 | #32 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: European Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Posts: 215
Blog Entries: 3
|
The Free Speech Coalition opposes the .XXX TLD
Quote:
__________________
I am a centrist social authoritarian.
Left: 0.51, Authoritarian: 4.96 |
|
March 18th, 2009 | #33 | |||
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
|
Quote:
Quote:
I have heard that there were brothels in Franco's Spain but porn was suppressed. Certainly in Europe through the centuries there were other examples and I have no idea about the Muslim world but considering their religious iconoclasm I would expect them to be even more prohibitive of images and less so of the sex itself. Quote:
When I use that word I use it carefully and I mean it in the specific sense as a religious deriavative of Calvin's experiment with blue laws "Instituted" in Geneva and copied by the Puritans in England. The English kicked these laws out with the Puritans and the Jacobin levellers when they restored the monarchy. The Puritans brought their Judaizing zeal, their tikkun-olaming desire to "fix the world" with them to America. They or their heirs instituted the abomination called "abolition" which is the great grandparent of "civil rights." Also they were ultimately responsible for "enfranchisement" of women as well as negroes-- hence of one of the strains of feminism before Steneim and her pack of Jewesses-- and also alcohol prohibition too. If you look into Evanston Illinois for example, it was in the time of Prohibition the home of the WCTU and not yet a Jew haven, but an old stock WASP one. So I use the word "puritannical" intentionally and affirm what I said in light of this explanation. When we hit on Jews for this and that, its not just on the basis of actual Jews in recent history, but also the influence of Judaizing creeds. I am a Roman Catholic and I take Calvinism as a Judaizing heresy of Christianity, that attempted to "go back to the early Church before the pagan Romans took it over" etc etc etc. I grew up with that Reformed/ Presbyterian mindset and have rejected it. Experience has taught me that Roman Catholics and Greek or Russian Orthodox have a more forgiving attitude towards vice, on the one hand, and on the other hand, are more moderate in their political ideas and do not fly off under ideological brands like "free speech" into some idiotic social policy that will not work. Americans, God bless us, are more Protestant-like, and hence more subject to one ideology or another, which leaves us liable to the Jew word manipulators. We need to be tied more to our roots, more to our history, and more to our own political forms that predated the Enlightenment with its idolatrous enthronement of socalled "reason" and its liberalizing enfranchisement of Jewry. |
|||
March 18th, 2009 | #34 |
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
|
Tommy, part of what I am driving at, is that the Puritan heritage of America, makes us more willing to embark on crazy shifts of legal policy which represent drastic departures from past years. We can turn our policy ship on a dime, because of the American's willingness to twist his brain into knots over religious ideas.
Americans are thus essentially NOT conservative and we never have been. What is conservative? Aristocratic, monarchichal, Catholic/Orthodox Europe, thats what. A social order overturned by the Reformation and French and other such like Revolutions. The Enlightenment fancy was that you could impose a "better" idea of how society should be-- that you just thought up overnight-like, in place of a time tested method of how society really was. So, you could just say the caste system was unjust, toss it overboard, and voila here you now will all follow the Roussevian egalitarian fancy. Or Marxist, whatever. Except humans are caste animals and every society forms castes. Same thing alcohol and sex. I am not a prohibitionist. At the same time I am not a prohibitionist, I have no problem with reasonable social regulation of vices. The Jewish-befuddled brains of the "liberterians" are under another rationalistic social ideology that rejects all this. More stupid Judaizing horseshit. The Jew jumps up and down and whips you with his "slippery slope" arguments that are, always total bullshit. Slipperly slope! They cry. Its annoying. In the case of "porn as free speech," this is essentially what has happened. Its as if they repealed prohibition of booze and then decided, while they were at it, that anybody could sell everclear whenever and whereever they wanted without a license, and that booze was just like any other kind of sustenance. That's what the Jews are telling us, that porn is just like any other speech. Bullshit! No it isnt. Its different and has different social effects. Anybody with a brain not whipped into submission by Jewish commissars from the ACLU can see that. So, to summarize, lets be realistic observers of human behavior, be willing to regulate vice appropriately, but do not impose more harm with our laws than we seek to eliminate with any sort of draconian foolishness. I would take the same approach to drugs by the way. |
March 18th, 2009 | #35 | |
Enkidu
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Under the Panopticon.
Posts: 4,297
|
Quote:
Any porn, including the mild pictures in Playboy at that time (1969 -- 1971) were strictly illegal. Mike
__________________
Hunter S. Thompson, "Big dark, coming soon" |
|
March 19th, 2009 | #36 | |
Ἀντίοχος Ἐπιφανὴς
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: flyover
Posts: 13,175
|
Quote:
To me this is a healthier social regime. One in which social interaction is encouraged, and social atomization discouraged. The internet, is a medium for both social atomization and integration. When we use it to communicate about things that bring us together, its positive for integration. When we use it to practice vices like credit-spending, gambling, or porn, it breaks good valuable social bonds and facilities the practice of solitary vice, which harms us individually and socially. When you talk about obscenity however, in both old version of the law and the new, how the obscene material was published is important. Its reasonable to recognize spheres of privacy I believe, and that was one element of the old analysis carried into the new. Obviously you have to view erotica with a far more tolerant eye when shared lets say, by a man and wife, than, erotica spewed forth on tv via the mass media. Again, social impact is and should be a consideration for the trier of fact, and the older legal approach allowed for this under the jury system and local community standards. |
|
April 8th, 2009 | #37 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 10
|
Quote:
|
|
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|