Pornography leads to rape of toddler (suspect, radical, companies, economic)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well...we know peeping toms are shy I suppose and need a little boost to get the acceptance going...its ok tommy we understand....maybe one day the one will be truly found, it would be so wonderful wouldntit
One could post stories like this all day. Every sex crime is fueled by pornography, and everyone knows this, but most prefer to hide from this reality behind a diabolical interpretation of the First Amendment that would horrify the framers of the Constitution.
Pornography is destroying men.
Pornography is destroying children.
Are you a porn addict with children? If you aren't man enough to kick the habit, at least keep it entirely out of the house and off your home computer. If you expose your children to porn, even by accident, you're no better than the foster parents responsible for this atrocity.
Oh, and by the way: note that the pornography was homosexual in nature. Not a surprise, as this group practically defines itself by pornography. Here's another great argument to keep foster children out of the homes of open homosexuals.
I'm pretty sure if a team of psychologists went to your house and examined all of your "research material" regarding homosexuality and pornography, they would conclude you have some sort of an obsession with sexuality that is out of the norm.
the founding fathers would have outlawed it as a potential threat by the tendency for habitual reliance away from the order of natural contribution in good healthy community participation , much like a narcotic which is unnatural and an interference to the individual...how a society allows the stuff to knock at every door in the guise of constructive info by company kept in the communicating world...i will never know. This along with absolute violence depicted in some of the horror films, accidently rented and seen is a menace to everything virtually known to man....an available bottle of aspirin is one thing, a case of rye or heroin knocking at the door of youth after school with the parents working is ridiculous....all it says is that the adults in this world think its a normal part of life....this is crazy
the founding fathers would have outlawed it as a potential threat by the tendency for habitual reliance away from the order of natural contribution in good healthy community participation , much like a narcotic which is unnatural and an interference to the individual...how a society allows the stuff to knock at every door in the guise of constructive info by company kept in the communicating world...i will never know. This along with absolute violence depicted in some of the horror films, accidently rented and seen is a menace to everything virtually known to man....an available bottle of aspirin is one thing, a case of rye or heroin knocking at the door of youth after school with the parents working is ridiculous....all it says is that the adults in this world think its a normal part of life....this is crazy
I doubt it. They would have recognized that mature adults could handle it and, therefore, no need for heavy government interference.
well there can't be any complaining when we read the story of a guy from Chicago whos 28 yrs old with no job and has promised to stop fathering children after 23 smurfs and a year and a half later is up to 38 smurfs....the youth just do what they are told one way or another as they grow up and try to put the brainwashed dreams out on the canvas...so, what can anybody say...( money, abortion issues...ect ect ect ect
Being an old man..I agree to a degree with the writer that states pornography is homosexual in nature. For the most part that is what I noticed also...There is almost always an image of a naked male in most porn...I could see how a kid would get confused with the display not just of female genitals but male also...Porn years ago never contained a male figure. One writer said those who look at porn are just peeping toms..instead of hiding behind a bush it is a computer screen...That is pretty accurate- If it was real life would a porn watcher enjoy watching others have sex? If so there is something wrong with an individual who is fixated on other rather than having the experience themselves...It's like a dog getting a kick out of watching another dog eat...and not eating itself.......Today's porn is destroying the alpha male and making men into peering dogs.
Interesting take. You always hear of the degradation of women; but I think pornography does the majority of its damage to men (figuring we're talking about men as the viewers and women as the viewed). I can't imagine under any circumstances even a "normal" porn-viewing routine having a positive impact on one's social life. People do like to talk about it as a learning tool, but I really think that's BS. Members of the human race have never needed to learn how to have sex. Ever. Nor have they needed to learn how to have "better" sex, really. To the extent that different people are turned on by different things, and that men and women are open about their turn-ons and turn-offs (and can talk or sign), all you need is communication between you and your partner.
Lung cancer was around long before cigarettes. So?
There are many kinds of lung cancers ... lots of causes other than smoking cigarettes.
So far, as of this post of mine, I am halfway through reading this thread for amusement ... WP, you have failed to respond to any logical challenges. I see why you gave up posting your continual nonsense on the California forum. But it is baffling that you thought you could simply do better on any other forum. The California posters thrashed you every time you appeared. Now, when I see you on the Politics forum it is the same story.
Yet you persist. Which takes me back to my theory that you troll this crap you do for two reasons:
1. you are obsessed with sex -- and particularly homosexuality ... all pointing to repressions
2. you love to be reviled in the fervent belief it will bring you favor in the eyes of your imaginary god ... he will reward you for your suffering on his behalf ... and that will earn you a seat next to him in heaven ... perhaps you will be able to sit so close you can actually rub thighs!
Because possession of military assault rifles makes shooting rampages more likely, even if not committed by most owners. Increase the number of such weapons in society, and the number of incidents will increase as well. That doesn't mean there should be more restrictions necessarily - maybe the benefits outweigh the costs (another discussion) - but the argument itself is anon sequitur.
Try this:
Most people who smoke cigarettes don't get lung cancer; and many people who have lung cancer never smoked cigarettes; therefore, cigarettes do not cause lung cancer.
See the problem here?
No. I don't. It is a false set of correlations to achieve any logical conclusion. There is no legitimate "therefore" in your postulation.
Now I know that you are a bona fide extremist Catholic (so much so that other Catholics on these boards shun you).
And I know that Logic is a common subject in Catholic colleges -- and I am guessing you attended one. I did once, in spite of being an atheist. And I took my Logic 101 at that Catholic college. I also note that you often attempt to engage in forum debates as if you are a super-logician. And yet you fail -- miserably -- time and time again. I assume you never took Logic 101 ... or at least if you did: you failed.
One could post stories like this all day. Every sex crime is fueled by pornography, and everyone knows this, but most prefer to hide from this reality behind a diabolical interpretation of the First Amendment that would horrify the framers of the Constitution.
Pornography is destroying men.
Pornography is destroying children.
Are you a porn addict with children? If you aren't man enough to kick the habit, at least keep it entirely out of the house and off your home computer. If you expose your children to porn, even by accident, you're no better than the foster parents responsible for this atrocity.
Oh, and by the way: note that the pornography was homosexual in nature. Not a surprise, as this group practically defines itself by pornography. Here's another great argument to keep foster children out of the homes of open homosexuals.
Someone who would rape a small child is obviously very mentally screwed up and porn has nothing to do with it. That's like saying that Al Qaeda were inspired by movies about terrorism.
Sex crimes have occurred throughout history, including in societies with no porn. Unless you think places like Afghanistan and sub-Saharan Africa are rife with porn.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
