So if it's not immoral between two consenting adults, why do you agree with geordiejackie's position that it is?
I was agreeing with op that I had morals,nothing else.this was in response to a poster calling me a prude when I had already told them we would agree to differ.
I'm pretty sure when he said how do you know they were telling the truth he was referring to this:
I do find that quite a staggering comment to be honest. i know many women that like it up the arse. i'm wondering how many women you asked, whether it was a representative sample, and if they were telling the truth.
I asked, got an answer to a completely different question. That or he asked his daughters if they fancied anal.
I agree with requiring adults to opt in to being able to access pornography. In my opinion, it is just bringing the internet in line with society norms. Shops cannot legally supply age restricted material to minors and adult shops must not show pornographic goods in the windows, adults have to opt in, they have to choose go into the store to see the goods on offer. The norm in society is that children are protected, it is not on public display, and adults have to choose to go accesss pornographic material.
the issue isn't about porn however so stop being so short-sighted
the issue is about whether in attempting to create this world where "we protect the children" we do so by inhibiting internet use that has nothing to do with content that should rightly be censored
the issue is whether this is nothing but a cosmetic pandering to a certain demographic as what is being suggested is technically difficult at best and probably impossible to achieve
the issue is who decides what content should or should not be regulated by the legislation and judging by the responses to this thread it would seem to be another impossible task to determine what is and is not acceptable
Porn aint going to go away so personally I'd legalise it and turn it into a legitimate business that pays taxes, can only employ/feature over 21's and by being legit offer those employed in it access to employees rights and health and safety standards.
The more you can distance it from the sick stuff the less chance there is for that material to ride piggyback on it and reduce the viewer/subscribers usual excuse of accidentally making one click too many when caught looking at/downloading the sick stuff.
Porn aint going to go away so personally I'd legalise it and turn it into a legitimate business that pays taxes, can only employ/feature over 21's and by being legit offer those employed in it access to employees rights and health and safety standards.
The more you can distance it from the sick stuff the less chance there is for that material to ride piggyback on it and reduce the viewer/subscribers usual excuse of accidentally making one click too many when caught looking at/downloading the sick stuff.
Isn't a lot of porn already legal it's only the stuff that is deemed "extreme" that is illegal
Isn't a lot of porn already legal it's only the stuff that is deemed "extreme" that is illegal
I'm not sure of the definitions tbh. I've always assumed anything stronger than the relatively soft porn you get on things like the adult channel you can subscribe to on SKY and the like was all illegal in this country.
I'm not sure of the definitions tbh. I've always assumed anything stronger than the relatively soft porn you get on things like the adult channel you can subscribe to on SKY and the like was all illegal in this country.
nope.
the only stuff that is illegal to own is that involving children, corpses or animals; or likely to do permanent damage to the genitals, breasts or anus or endangering a person's life.
these days hardcore porn is available on dvd with an R18 certificate. they can't show fisting because that is regarded as dangerous by the bbfc.
this law was introduced in 2008. it is mainly being used to crack down on pirate dvd sales. in one case someone was prosecuted for a cartoon of tony the tiger having sex emailed to him.
If something hasn't been classified by the British Board of Film Classification are you going to be allowed to watch it?
It says online videos will now be subject to the same rules as those sold in sex shops.
I should imagine there's a fair amount of stuff on the web that hasn't been classified, the BBFC simply wouldn't have the time. I doubt they'd watch and classify every single homemade porno for a start.
If you have no hang-ups with online porn, you have to contact your service provider to let them know, which, in turn, will place you on a 'hot list' accessible by the government?
If so, this is absolutely appalling!
What's even more staggering is that this is meant to be a Conservative (-led) government, with the other party claiming to be 'Liberal'. What on earth are 'Conservatism' and 'Liberalism' about if they're *not* about safeguarding individual freedoms and liberties, away from the prying eyes and meddling of the state?
David Cameron - you absolutely disgust me. Shame on you! Absolute shame on you!
the only stuff that is illegal to own is that involving children, corpses or animals; or likely to do permanent damage to the genitals, breasts or anus or endangering a person's life
these days hardcore porn is available on dvd with an R18 certificate. they can't show fisting because that is regarded as dangerous by the bbfc.
You said own - what about 'view' as in those subscription channels on Sky/Virgin? Is there a difference beween what you can play at home and what can be transmitted/streamed etc?
I didn't think the cameras could dwell on the business end on those channels (shows what I know if they can)
How do they judge what's likely to do "permanent" damage to a part of the body a baby (and multiples of) passes through?
You said own - what about 'view' as in those subscription channels on Sky/Virgin? Is there a difference beween what you can play at home and what can be transmitted/streamed etc?
I didn't think the cameras could dwell on the business end on those channels (shows what I know if they can)
How do they judge what's likely to do "permanent" damage to a part of the body a baby (and multiples of) passes through?
not on those channels no. but that is to do with broadcasting laws and licences.
the extreme pornography law is a bit of a mess to be honest.
i don't know how they judge what would do permanent damage. but it has been established that anal fisting and urethral sounding to do not.
in respect of what you can buy on dvd. with an R18 certificate you can now buy full on hard core gaping anal porn.
Will it be now though, how much of the stuff out there has been classified by the British Board of Film Classification? Will homemade adult porn movies now become illegal?
I suspect that this is the first step in a longer-term plan to make mainstream adult porn illegal again.
They daren't do it all at once as it would outrage the civil liberties lobby. So instead they're going for the drip-drip effect of creeping censorship. Softly softly, catchy monkey.
As I said earlier in the thread, after a few years when they see that it's made no difference to sex crime statistics (women will still be getting raped, kids will still be getting murdered), the government of the day will announce that "the current measures are ineffective, so clearly much more needs to be done" and then it'll be on to the next stage.
You can pretty much write the script already.
It's not about "protecting children" at all. That's just the emotive excuse that's being used. It's about censorship, and gaining control over the Internet.
If you have no hang-ups with online porn, you have to contact your service provider to let them know, which, in turn, will place you on a 'hot list' accessible by the government?
If so, this is absolutely appalling!
What's even more staggering is that this is meant to be a Conservative (-led) government, with the other party claiming to be 'Liberal'. What on earth are 'Conservatism' and 'Liberalism' about if they're *not* about safeguarding individual freedoms and liberties, away from the prying eyes and meddling of the state?
David Cameron - you absolutely disgust me. Shame on you! Absolute shame on you!
Regards,
Cypher
He can propose it, I doubt parliament will pass it. Well saying that, the LibDems won't but I've a feeling it will depend if Miliband thinks the focus groups are with him.
You are right though, it is shameful. You can imagine the first court case where this list is used as evidence against someone.
What's even more staggering is that this is meant to be a Conservative (-led) government, with the other party claiming to be 'Liberal'. What on earth are 'Conservatism' and 'Liberalism' about if they're *not* about safeguarding individual freedoms and liberties, away from the prying eyes and meddling of the state?
David Cameron - you absolutely disgust me. Shame on you! Absolute shame on you!
I agree. But don't make the mistake of thinking that Labour would be any better. If anything they'd be even worse, with Harriet Harman & co. running the show.
I agree. But don't make the mistake of thinking that Labour would be any better. If anything they'd be even worse, with Harriet Harman & co. running the show.
Labour would insist that you scan into your PC before viewing anyting.
If you have no hang-ups with online porn, you have to contact your service provider to let them know, which, in turn, will place you on a 'hot list' accessible by the government?
If so, this is absolutely appalling!
What's even more staggering is that this is meant to be a Conservative (-led) government, with the other party claiming to be 'Liberal'. What on earth are 'Conservatism' and 'Liberalism' about if they're *not* about safeguarding individual freedoms and liberties, away from the prying eyes and meddling of the state?
David Cameron - you absolutely disgust me. Shame on you! Absolute shame on you!
Regards,
Cypher
Methinks he started out wanting to deal with the darker sicker stuff but has found himself backed into a political corner he's going to struggle to get out of.
He dared advocate gay marriage so the self appointed guardians of human morality are going to really push him now he's dared open this particular can of worms infront of them.
So many ambiguous new rulings, laws... we seem to be edging towards a society where any one can be charged with something by the powers that be if need be.
Comments
So cynical it stinks.
But the tabloid-reading chattering classes will fall for it hook, line and sinker.
so are we saying nipples are fine. it's just muff that corrupts the nation?
pussy is more is more dangerous than tits?
I was agreeing with op that I had morals,nothing else.this was in response to a poster calling me a prude when I had already told them we would agree to differ.
I asked, got an answer to a completely different question. That or he asked his daughters if they fancied anal.
no he or she is preparing his children by pretending that anal sex doesn't exist.
Tits are killing tool http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=woman%20kills%20man%20with%20her%20breasts&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2F2013%2F01%2F16%2Fdonna-lange-breasts-smother-kill-boyfriend-everett-washington_n_2486189.html&ei=1TLtUfHqGqqb0AX5r4GQDg&usg=AFQjCNEWno7mbFDaey0NOtrCE0DxvbVVQw
makes sense to me.
the issue is about whether in attempting to create this world where "we protect the children" we do so by inhibiting internet use that has nothing to do with content that should rightly be censored
the issue is whether this is nothing but a cosmetic pandering to a certain demographic as what is being suggested is technically difficult at best and probably impossible to achieve
the issue is who decides what content should or should not be regulated by the legislation and judging by the responses to this thread it would seem to be another impossible task to determine what is and is not acceptable
The more you can distance it from the sick stuff the less chance there is for that material to ride piggyback on it and reduce the viewer/subscribers usual excuse of accidentally making one click too many when caught looking at/downloading the sick stuff.
It's disgusting isn't it.
It's one of the worst cases of using a line to push through a load of other stuff I've seen.
Isn't a lot of porn already legal it's only the stuff that is deemed "extreme" that is illegal
I'm not sure of the definitions tbh. I've always assumed anything stronger than the relatively soft porn you get on things like the adult channel you can subscribe to on SKY and the like was all illegal in this country.
nope.
the only stuff that is illegal to own is that involving children, corpses or animals; or likely to do permanent damage to the genitals, breasts or anus or endangering a person's life.
these days hardcore porn is available on dvd with an R18 certificate. they can't show fisting because that is regarded as dangerous by the bbfc.
this law was introduced in 2008. it is mainly being used to crack down on pirate dvd sales. in one case someone was prosecuted for a cartoon of tony the tiger having sex emailed to him.
If something hasn't been classified by the British Board of Film Classification are you going to be allowed to watch it?
It says online videos will now be subject to the same rules as those sold in sex shops.
I should imagine there's a fair amount of stuff on the web that hasn't been classified, the BBFC simply wouldn't have the time. I doubt they'd watch and classify every single homemade porno for a start.
If you have no hang-ups with online porn, you have to contact your service provider to let them know, which, in turn, will place you on a 'hot list' accessible by the government?
If so, this is absolutely appalling!
What's even more staggering is that this is meant to be a Conservative (-led) government, with the other party claiming to be 'Liberal'. What on earth are 'Conservatism' and 'Liberalism' about if they're *not* about safeguarding individual freedoms and liberties, away from the prying eyes and meddling of the state?
David Cameron - you absolutely disgust me. Shame on you! Absolute shame on you!
Regards,
Cypher
You said own - what about 'view' as in those subscription channels on Sky/Virgin? Is there a difference beween what you can play at home and what can be transmitted/streamed etc?
I didn't think the cameras could dwell on the business end on those channels (shows what I know if they can)
How do they judge what's likely to do "permanent" damage to a part of the body a baby (and multiples of) passes through?
not on those channels no. but that is to do with broadcasting laws and licences.
the extreme pornography law is a bit of a mess to be honest.
i don't know how they judge what would do permanent damage. but it has been established that anal fisting and urethral sounding to do not.
in respect of what you can buy on dvd. with an R18 certificate you can now buy full on hard core gaping anal porn.
I suspect that this is the first step in a longer-term plan to make mainstream adult porn illegal again.
They daren't do it all at once as it would outrage the civil liberties lobby. So instead they're going for the drip-drip effect of creeping censorship. Softly softly, catchy monkey.
As I said earlier in the thread, after a few years when they see that it's made no difference to sex crime statistics (women will still be getting raped, kids will still be getting murdered), the government of the day will announce that "the current measures are ineffective, so clearly much more needs to be done" and then it'll be on to the next stage.
You can pretty much write the script already.
It's not about "protecting children" at all. That's just the emotive excuse that's being used. It's about censorship, and gaining control over the Internet.
"For the good of society", naturally
He can propose it, I doubt parliament will pass it. Well saying that, the LibDems won't but I've a feeling it will depend if Miliband thinks the focus groups are with him.
You are right though, it is shameful. You can imagine the first court case where this list is used as evidence against someone.
I agree. But don't make the mistake of thinking that Labour would be any better. If anything they'd be even worse, with Harriet Harman & co. running the show.
Labour would insist that you scan into your PC before viewing anyting.
Methinks he started out wanting to deal with the darker sicker stuff but has found himself backed into a political corner he's going to struggle to get out of.
He dared advocate gay marriage so the self appointed guardians of human morality are going to really push him now he's dared open this particular can of worms infront of them.
State control...
Royal baby due and loyal Tories turning on their leader
priceless
regards jack