bush_cheney2004 Posted August 16, 2009 Report Posted August 16, 2009 (edited) Given no one has managed to demonstrate how some guy downloading a twenty year old picture in his basement endangers public safety I have to call this one a lie. Again...what you think is irrelevant. The porn industry now takes great measures to ID and prove majority age, on file with a recognized index. The US Supreme Court has afforded no protection to kiddie porn even when depicted by majority age individuals...not even in art. Given you seem to spend much of your waking life on a Canadian web site discussing largely Canadian political and social issues I think I'll just have to laugh this one off. Bullshit...this is just another thread that proves you can't live without constantly referring to Americans and whatever it is they are doing. Go find some more "black rapist" data. There's that old Republican moral purity attitude. Democrats don't like kiddie porn either...maybe you would have better luck with the NDP. I can get you a copy of "Talk Dirty To Me Part III" if you want it.....LOL! Edited August 16, 2009 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest American Woman Posted August 16, 2009 Report Posted August 16, 2009 Given no one has managed to demonstrate how some guy downloading a twenty year old picture in his basement endangers public safety I have to call this one a lie. Given how you haven't managed to prove the men in question were downloading twenty year old pictures, I have to call this one a lie. Seems as if the "twenty year old pictures" claim seems to be of significance to you, which really makes me think you do realize the seriousness of the charges. For some reason, you seem to think if the pictures are old, the offense is somehow 'ok.' The offense, regardless of the age of the pictures (which I somehow doubt are twenty years old), is the same. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted August 16, 2009 Report Posted August 16, 2009 QUOTE= Argus: There's that old Republican moral purity attitude.Democrats don't like kiddie porn either... I'm proof of that. No one can accuse me of being a Republican. Quote
Shady Posted August 16, 2009 Report Posted August 16, 2009 If you go to Europe - to Israel, to south America and Australia, you routinely find topless and nude beaches. They're quite blasé about such things. Yes they are. It's a different culture, but that doesn't equate with your premise that North America is "puritanical." Try watching an episode of Desperate Housewives. You're stuck in a 1950's time warp. In most of the United States, and to a somewhat lesser extent Canada (we tend to take after them) the idea of nude beaches instantly draws a connection to nefarious sexual conduct. That's pure projection. Maybe that's how you instantly feel. But stop speaking for everyone else. It seems to me, you have your own prejudices to work out. Not necessarily the rest of society. Because that's not the connection I instantly come to, and it wouldn't be from most of the people I know. Quote
g_bambino Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 It's a different culture, but that doesn't equate with your premise that North America is "puritanical." Perhaps what he's getting at is that North America is more puritanical than some other places in the world, and America perhaps the most puritanical on this continent (Mexico, as a predominantly Catholic country, may be worse; I don't know). Argus is quite right that European culture is far more open to nudity and sex than us here in the Western Hemisphere, and Canadians more than Americans. In Britain you've got topless women in daily, mainstream newspapers, in Germany nudity in public is almost a non-issue, in Sweden erections are used as gags in ads to sell newspapers. Here, we allow some profanity and nudity on regular cable, such as on Showcase. In the States, though, cartoon butt cheeks are blurred out, nude allegorical statues are covered with drapes, the most innocuous "swears" are bleeped out, and the nation goes batty when a partly covered breast is seen at the Super Bowl half-time show; once there's a full-fontal nude scene in Desperate Housewives, then I'll change my opinion. It's no Iran, but south of our border there's a pretty high degree of prudishness, and I can see how the same Bible-based moral codes that lead to this squeamishness over anything to do with sex can have an effect on the punishments doled out for sexual crimes, including ones related to children. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 (edited) ....Here, we allow some profanity and nudity on regular cable, such as on Showcase. In the States, though, cartoon butt cheeks are blurred out, nude allegorical statues are covered with drapes, the most innocuous "swears" are bleeped out, and the nation goes batty when a partly covered breast is seen at the Super Bowl half-time show; once there's a full-fontal nude scene in Desperate Housewives, then I'll change my opinion. It's no Iran, but south of our border there's a pretty high degree of prudishness, and I can see how the same Bible-based moral codes that lead to this squeamishness over anything to do with sex can have an effect on the punishments doled out for sexual crimes, including ones related to children. You obviously have not seen much American "regular cable" television programming or visited Black's Beach in SOCAL. Nor have you sampled American print media, satellite radio, or motion pictures. Because if you had, you would realize just how silly such claims are. Canada has it's own set of hangups as well....not so "sophisticated" after all: http://www.xtra.ca/public/Toronto/The_shor..._laws-7192.aspx Edited August 17, 2009 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest TrueMetis Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 You obviously have not seen much American "regular cable" television programming or visited Black's Beach in SOCAL. Nor have you sampled American print media, satellite radio, or motion pictures. Because if you had, you would realize just how silly such claims are.Canada has it's own set of hangups as well....not so "sophisticated" after all: http://www.xtra.ca/public/Toronto/The_shor..._laws-7192.aspx This doesn't make any sense the age of consent is 16, but if your sixteen and put pics on the internet it's still child porn. Also why did they raise the age of consent to 16 from 14 what difference does 2 years make? Quote
g_bambino Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 You obviously have not seen much American "regular cable" television programming or visited Black's Beach in SOCAL. Nor have you sampled American print media, satellite radio, or motion pictures. I have indeed (save for the beach, but that doesn't really negate anything). Perhaps you think I'm misguided because you consider "racy" what others in Canada and more in Europe wouldn't. I know sex is pervasive throughout American media, but it's representation is still pretty tame in comparison. Canada has it's own set of hangups as well... I never said otherwise. Quote
Argus Posted August 17, 2009 Author Report Posted August 17, 2009 It does seem a little exponentially over the top. I'm sure it happens all the time.Speaking of over the top, I know a young lady, a friend of my daughter's, who went through what must be a true nightmare. She posted pictures of herself and members of a wrestling team she'd been involved with for years on the Internet. She'd been a member of the team for years and had now volunteered to chaperone them on a out-of-town trip. These were pictures of them horsing aroung in their underwear in their hotel room and were similar to many pictures taken by many kids over the years. The difference now is that she is an adult albeit a few mere months older than the girls and she posted these pictures on her Facebook page. Some parent complained which resulted in the seizure of this young lady's computer. As it turns out she also a nude picture she had taken of herself stored on the computer. The authorities seemingly came unglued at this point. She was subsequently arrested, strip-searched and held in jail for several hours as this was investigated. And you know, the sad part is they almost certainly went easy on her because she was a young woman. Had she been male she'd likely have been charged. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 17, 2009 Author Report Posted August 17, 2009 Again...what you think is irrelevant. The porn industry now takes great measures to ID and prove majority age, on file with a recognized index. The US Supreme Court has afforded no protection to kiddie porn even when depicted by majority age individuals...not even in art. Thank you for again supporting my belief that it's all about moral purity and not public safety or harm to children. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 17, 2009 Author Report Posted August 17, 2009 Given how you haven't managed to prove the men in question were downloading twenty year old pictures, I have to call this one a lie.Seems as if the "twenty year old pictures" claim seems to be of significance to you, which really makes me think you do realize the seriousness of the charges. For some reason, you seem to think if the pictures are old, the offense is somehow 'ok.' The offense, regardless of the age of the pictures (which I somehow doubt are twenty years old), is the same. The point I'm making is that your entire foundation of support for this - other than moral purity - rests on the theory that somehow or other the guy downloading a picture is contributing to the crime. How do you contribute to a crime which happened a thousand miles away, and twenty years ago? No, I can't prove the pictures in this instance were twenty years old. However, in one of the cites I posted, the people tudying internet porn found that more than 90% was at least 10-15 years old. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
M.Dancer Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 Canada is not immune to this hysteria over child pornography, but we seem to lack that vicious moral puritanism which allows Americans to subject their fellows to cruel and unusual sentences for crimes of percieved immorality. I don't find the sentence to be either cruel or unusual. I think it is appropriate. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Argus Posted August 17, 2009 Author Report Posted August 17, 2009 This doesn't make any sense the age of consent is 16, but if your sixteen and put pics on the internet it's still child porn.Also why did they raise the age of consent to 16 from 14 what difference does 2 years make? I've never thought it made sense, particularly the parts which deal with works of imagination, ie, drawings drawn from the imagination, or even fictional stories. The bizarro element is that you can go to jail for viewing naked pictures of someone - but if you instead just have sex with them, the law is okay with that. As to raising the age of consent. My understanding is the impetus was pimps recruiting young girls in shopping malls. not an epidemic of middle aged men seducing teenagers. It was felt 16 year olds were just a bit less likely to fall for such things than 14 year olds. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Oleg Bach Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 I've never thought it made sense, particularly the parts which deal with works of imagination, ie, drawings drawn from the imagination, or even fictional stories. The bizarro element is that you can go to jail for viewing naked pictures of someone - but if you instead just have sex with them, the law is okay with that.As to raising the age of consent. My understanding is the impetus was pimps recruiting young girls in shopping malls. not an epidemic of middle aged men seducing teenagers. It was felt 16 year olds were just a bit less likely to fall for such things than 14 year olds. Those using the poor for selfish sexual gratification though prostitution are low life..Those that call kiddy porn sketches "art" as some hetor-phag judge did in Vancouver a number of years back - holds the unwashed masses in contempt along with their unwashed children. As for works of "imagination" - show some so called "art" of puppies being mutiltated - and there is a public uproar as they come to the defence of little shit machines with sweet big eyes...where as the abuse of adults AND children - is exceptable - funny how we hate our own species...and believe that all human beings innocent and guilty of some crime must ALL be punished and disempowered. We have lost our human diginity...when we allow the diginity of others to be removed, no matter who they be. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 I have indeed (save for the beach, but that doesn't really negate anything). Perhaps you think I'm misguided because you consider "racy" what others in Canada and more in Europe wouldn't. I know sex is pervasive throughout American media, but it's representation is still pretty tame in comparison. You may be of that opinion, but the reality is quite different. Don't confuse perception with reality....there is plenty that is not tame. Even the likes of a relatively "tame" Playboy magazine went mainstream in the 1950's, years before any such thing existed in Canada....if it did at all. Al Goldstein and Larry Flynt pushed boundaries that Canadians could only dream of. Fast forward to today and we find a very diversified, $13 billion porn industry in America.....somebody is buying it. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 Thank you for again supporting my belief that it's all about moral purity and not public safety or harm to children. If you want to support child pornography at any level, that's your business. But don't think you can do it legally in Canada either. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 You may be of that opinion, but the reality is quite different. Don't confuse perception with reality....there is plenty that is not tame. Even the likes of a relatively "tame" Playboy magazine went mainstream in the 1950's, years before any such thing existed in Canada....if it did at all. Al Goldstein and Larry Flynt pushed boundaries that Canadians could only dream of. Fast forward to today and we find a very diversified, $13 billion porn industry in America.....somebody is buying it. I am just amazed that we have allowed perversion to blossom in our society - that the term sex now includes infants and same sex debauchery - this is not sex..this is social dysfunction. People buying porn are the same jerks that buy Viagra - people who can not make contact with the opposite sex in a meaningful way - and those that need chemical assistance because they mated with the wrong person for all the wrong reasons. If you need a pill to get it up- you need to be with someone compatable - but in western society we pair up for finacial reasons - reasons of fleeting lust - and status....look at the mentality that exists "I am the secretary of state" - crazed individuals that can not even service their own husbands and vise versa - power and dominance is now the abuse born in our modernity...and love has flown out the window...but I guess those that need to keep the juices flowing though normal porno should continue - as a temporary measure - Ben Franklin had it right - 'sex for health reasons only" - Now we do not equate sex with love or the continuation of life - but with death and violence..wtf? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 (edited) Double Post Edited August 17, 2009 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 I am just amazed that we have allowed perversion to blossom in our society - that the term sex now includes infants and same sex debauchery - this is not sex..this is social dysfunction. People buying porn are the same jerks that buy Viagra - people who can not make contact with the opposite sex in a meaningful way - and those that need chemical assistance because they mated with the wrong person for all the wrong reasons...... You could teach Argus a lesson or two....he doesn't understand the marketing of porn and its relationship to the perception of risky behavior, "puritan" morality, or pushing the limits of society's taboos. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Oleg Bach Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 Double Post I second that - you learn as you get older -- and you become more natural - becoming 59 at the end of the month...I sometimes wonder - jezzz - is this thing stopped working? Is it over for me - all the joy and fun I had with my best friend and toy...THEN I notice ---It works just fine - IF - you are with someone that is just fine....spending part of the weekend with my X - I decieded to leave the booze and steak and her behind - I have become particular...You need someone with a mind - someone who finds the NATURAL foremost of importance - not the pills and the pot - that the misguided liberal coucelling --------------"I rather drink muddy water and sleep in a hollow log"..... Quote
eyeball Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 If you want to support child pornography at any level, that's your business. But don't think you can do it legally in Canada either. I don't think anyone is supporting child pornography. Speaking for myself, I'm simply questioning why there has to be such an element of vindictiveness to the investigations, prosecutions and incarcerations of suspects and perpetrators. I see no reason why the entire enforcement/justice/penal system shouldn't be expected to maintain the same sense of impartiality that's expected from it in other cases. Anything less opens the door to giving the mob its say. Even worse is the effect of letting the anger of the mob seep into the system. I think the case of the young lady I described underscores how unneccesarily harmful it can be when this happens. Police lose their perspective which opens the door to abuse and if the public simply shrugs this off or worse actively supports it, I would suggest the descent down a slippery slope is well underway. My sentiment extends to the oft-expressed desire that people convicted of the sexual exploitation of kids be fed to the general prison population in hopes that these 'monsters' will get their justice at the hands of some other monster. In my opinion this is an even greater perversion. What happens when we let these other monsters out? I fail to see how society benefits from having people that have been given virtual carte blanch to commit the kinds of nightmarish things that belong in snuff films or slasher movies loose on the streets. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Oleg Bach Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 Racist judges release black gang bangers back into society so they can kill more of their own - It's like executing those you hate with their own hand - a very clever system. Quote
eyeball Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 Racist judges release black gang bangers back into society so they can kill more of their own No they don't. It's like executing those you hate with their own hand a very clever system. No its anything but clever. Any society that allowed such a thing would likely be in such a degenerated state that its collapse would probably be imminent. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Guest American Woman Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 (edited) The point I'm making is that your entire foundation of support for this - other than moral purity - rests on the theory that somehow or other the guy downloading a picture is contributing to the crime. How do you contribute to a crime which happened a thousand miles away, and twenty years ago?No, I can't prove the pictures in this instance were twenty years old. However, in one of the cites I posted, the people tudying internet porn found that more than 90% was at least 10-15 years old. "Moral purity" has nothing to do with my supporting laws against child pornography, so don't make things up. I'm especially against any crime committed that involves children, I'm especially against any abuse that involves children. I already made that quite clear because the child is helpless. The child has no say in the manner, unlike the adult who chooses to engage in unlawful behavior. Furthermore, it's not a "theory" that the guy downloading is contributing to 'a crime;' it's a fact, in both of our countries, that the person downloading child porn is committing a crime. As for how they are contributing to the crime of taking the photos, again I explained this quite clearly. If there were no market for child porn, there would be no child porn. Surely you are able to comprehend/understand that. Furthermore, since you can't prove the pictures in this instance were twenty years old, why do you keep stating that they were?? I don't know if you are correct in saying that 90% of internet porn is at least 10-15 years old or not, but it really makes no difference. For one thing, I'm sure a child who was forced into pornographic pictures is no less happy to have their picture on the internet today, as an adult, than they would be as a child. You seriously don't realize that? But if most porn is 10-15 years old, why have you kept repeating that the porn in the instances you are referring to were taken twenty years ago? Furthermore, how do you know no one within a thousand miles is downloading the pictures? That's a crazy assumption. One last point. If someone is breaking the law downloading child porn, do you seriously think it's up to the police/courts to spend money and man hours doing detective work to find out how OLD the pictures are before determining if a crime has been committed or not? That's ludicrous. Edited August 17, 2009 by American Woman Quote
Oleg Bach Posted August 17, 2009 Report Posted August 17, 2009 Any fixation on chidren as sexaul objects it totally bizarre--even in the wild kingdom - YOU never see a full gown animal attempting to mount an infant... It is a sign of insanity. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.