rape has nothing to do with sexual attractionTRUE. The most basic understanding of rape starts with rape being about power and control and punishment and has nothing to do with sex or attraction.
all pedophiles are sick peopleTRUE if we are working from a strict definition of the word, and few people do. Specifically it's
a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger, though onset of puberty may vary). The way CP and many other statues work, and the entire
To Catch a Predator mentality tends to view it as any sex at all under the age of 18. I'm surprised the morality police haven't shut down productions of
Romeo and Juliet because while R&J are too busy ->-bleeped-<-ing like bunnies to listen to their parents she is 'almost 14" which means, she is 13 in that play. So if we're talking about true CP with prepubescent humans, then sure, if we're talking about 17 year olds, that gets a lot trickier.
i don't think porn can make people into rapistsTRUE. Rape is independent of porn. In fact many of the most puritanical society's, those that would heavy restrict materials with strong sexual content, have pretty high rates of rape. In fact I think porn prevents rape. But hey, don't believe me. A study at the Northwestern School of Law found that while the availability/quality/distribution of porn has skyrocketed in the last 25 years the
reported incidents of rape have decreased 85%. That's pretty amazing stuff.
http://anthonydamato.law.northwestern.edu/Adobefiles/porn.pdfor...
A 10 percent increase in Net access yields about a 7.3 percent decrease in reported rapes.http://www.slate.com/id/2152487/or...
Indeed it appears from our data from Japan, as it was evident to Kutchinsky (1994), from research in Europe and Scandinavia, that a large increase in available sexually explicit materials, over many years, has not been correlated with an increase in rape or other sexual crimes. Instead, in Japan a marked decrease in sexual crimes has occurred.http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1999-pornography-rape-sex-crimes-japan.htmlI think pedophiles are sick people. How they become this way I don't knowObviously because of something that happened, or they associated with childhood. They just took it in the wrong direction. But lots of fetish behavior, like a good over the knee spanking, have childhood roots. Really, for all the "Sex is for Adults" rhetoric, most real sexual activity is, if not juvinale, at least highly adolescent.
Pornography is immoralI must have missed the 11th Commandment somehow, mine only go up to 10. And I'm also missing where Jesus railed against people spanking the monkey to naughty drawings (and Jesus was living in a Roman occupied country, so there was plenty of porn, tons of it). There is a very specific prohibition against adultery, which has been used to condemn anything and everything sexual, but if you actually read the book, you'll find that when they say 'adultery' they don't mean unwed sex, premarital sex, or masturbation, they mean sex between married people who are not married to each other.
A substantial amount of the porno out there is not even people having full out, hard on sex. It's pictures of naked, or nearly naked women. That's all. Assuming that the model was willing, the photographer was willing, and the viewer was willing then I'm having trouble seeing the immorality of that. I thought the body was god's creation, a temple of the lord and all that.
And who exactly is the immoral person in all of that? The model, the photographer, the viewer, or no one until someone masturbates to it? You know if it doesn't turn anyone on (appeal to prurient interest as the legal people say it) it can't be porn by definition.
And given that entire prurient interest stuff, is anything that appeals to anyone's prurient interest automatically porn? If so there are a bunch of people who put together catalogs from Sears and J.C. Penny's back in the 60s who should be doing some time, because I sure used the 'intimate apparel' section as part of my wicked ways.
Or what about people who have some weird fetish, like shoes? Should all shoe catalogs be banned? All shoe shots? Any picture of a woman wearing a shoe?
should be illegalI'm guessing that's straight out of the right-wing 'smaller government' handbook. We already have more people in jail (raw numbers or %, either way) than ANY OTHER COUNTRY, and now we ought to be tossing in every guy who is wanking it to a bunch of pictures of naked women? Or everyone whose ever taken photos of their own or someone else's naughty bits? Really? Is that your idea of 'land of the free'? Honestly, is that what you think the government should be doing?
And, here's the not so minor problem with all that. Define it. Yup, please define 'pornography' in such a way that it's also not going to eliminate half the art currently in museums. So that in your haste to make sure that weaker minds do not prevail you also don't put
The Birth of Venus by Botticelli, Michelangelo's
David, and
The Cealing of the Sistine Chapel into the trash heap as well. Our best legal minds have been over it, and over it, and over it and here is their considered, and august opinion:
We can't define it, but we know it when we see it. OK, groovy, so who's going to make that call? You or me? I have a PhD, 40 years of working in 'the arts' at least loosely defined, so I'm qualified. Or, you get the only people who could really make such a call, and those are artists, and they are not going to ban anything, so you're back at square one.
Oh yeah, you know the image of 'justice' we use, entitled
Spirit of Justice, the one that is in the US Department of Justice, and in a lot of courts in the US where such cases are going to be heard - well she's flashing some tit. As is
La Liberté Guidant le Peuple by Delacroix, hell she's flashing both of 'em (and major tatas they are too) - and that's a sacred national symbol in France and the inspiration for the Statue of Liberty. I was wondering if you favored smashing them to bits, blowing them up, or perhaps burning them in big public rallies? You could toss on all the books, magazines and records that you find offensive too. I could point you in the direction of planning events like this. Maybe you could even say a few words to begin the festivities. How 'bout:
"No to decadence and moral corruption! Yes to decency and morality in family and state!" That was a big hit for Goebbels the last time we did this. I always tripped out on the fact that amoung the stuff they burned were the works of nineteenth-century German-Jewish poet Heinrich Heine. He wrote 1821 play,
Almansor "Dort, wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen"* I'm not sure if that's poetic, or ironic, or both.
* - "Where they burn books, they will in the end also burn people."
