PirateNews and Child Porn
POSTED BY: Hero
UPDATED: Thursday, December 7, 2006 16:42
VIEWED: 36438
PAGE 5 of 17
Hero- IMHO altho what PN posted was disturbing in my view it was not "obscene". The only emotions it aroused in me was horror and pity. But what you saw in the picture was what you brought to it: an inability to deal with sexual relations from anything other than a position of intimidation. I haven't forgotten about the time you "joked" (yeah, ha ha) about calling in Homeland Security on your ex's new boyfriend and having him rousted at 2 AM. You give breaks to Marines but throw the book at a mentally retarded kid. You use the law for your personal power. This is just another one of those little games that you like to play.
I'm not fooled by your sanctimonious mouthings. You're a pervert in the making, if you aren't already one.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
What the--? Am I the only one who doesn't see any "child porn" going on in those pictures? Jeez, there's a difference between sex and violence. Put your fantasies aside and take a look at what's happening in the pictures. I see fully clothed children bound and gagged, and visibly terrified.
There is no difference in the US Code:
Quote:
(B), "sexually
explicit conduct" means actual or simulated -
(iv) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
And there is no exceptions for the type of use for the pictures. Law says no pictures of the abuse of children, actual or simulated and has been updated to specifically include pictures transmitted by computer.
Quote:
It disturbs me that so many folks believe that pictures that show the unambiguous suffering of children should be censored--makes me wonder if they'd really rather not know about it. I know that's not particularly fair, but the invisibility of child abuse is one of its most insidious characteristics. PN is not sexualizing these children, he's politicizing them.
So for you child porn is ok...as long as its political. And they have accused me of hiding behind politics.
I disagree with alot of you about alot of things. I enjoy the civil discussions and some of the poking we do. There is no place on this board or in any forum for child porn. If you disagree, fine, lets talk about it. If you disagree and post child porn, then you deserve to be arrested, thats not my opinion, thats the law.
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"So child porn is ok with you if the pictures are limited in number, and you understand the context, and you agree with the person posting it."
There's a new show on TV called 'kidnapped'. Another one, been on a while, called 'criminal minds'. You'll find worse 'simulated' photos, and even nastier context, on both. Both are broadcast every single week, over public airwaves, as entertainment.
As Tash pointed out, context is important. In context, this was not a porn posting.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So a story about genital mutilation or child prostitution or child soldiers or genocide with related but non-explicit pix would be "porn"?
Sure.
I personally think you need to get your head out of the gutter.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
As Tash pointed out, context is important. In context, this was not a porn posting.
PN used the picture to back up his claims that Bush and his 'cronies' sleep with kids. How do you think this was NOT a porn posting?
IMHO, if PN was discussing disciplinary tactics or knot tying or the need for children to get enough sleep or any other thing, the picture was inappropriate.
Posting to stir stuff up.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
But what you saw in the picture was what you brought to it: an inability to deal with sexual relations from anything other than a position of intimidation.
The picture is not illegal because of the person viewing it. Its illegal because of the harm to the person in it. These laws are about the protection of children from people who prey upon them. We as a society view these pictures are harmful to the children depicted and to all children. We have enacted a law against it.
If you disagree with the law, run for Congress:
Quote:
"Hi, I'm Signy. I think pictures showing children bound and gagged are ok by me. If you agree then vote for me. I promise to do my best to loosen child pornography laws, raise taxes, and surrender to the terrorists."
You might even have a shot in parts of Vermont and California...
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
There's a new show on TV called 'kidnapped'. Another one, been on a while, called 'criminal minds'. You'll find worse 'simulated' photos, and even nastier context, on both. Both are broadcast every single week, over public airwaves, as entertainment.
Call the FCC. I know CSI (or one of the other CBS crime dramas) took a hit for something like this a year or so ago.
I also note for the record that most TV shows that show something bordline explicit can prove the actor or actress was over 18 at the time...thats why all the 'kids' on shows like One Tree Hill look like they are in college.
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The context was to get people to DO SOMETHING about child exploitation. I don't buy in to PN's conspiracy theories, but I also know that kids are sold and abused every day in the USA because this world is full of people attracted to powerlessness. I know one mom whose daughter was kidnapped, and she can't get the county prosecutors to do jack about it. People like to stick their heads in the sand.
You know, there are a LOT of TV shows that push the "kid" button. They show kids being kidnapped, threatened, drugged, tortured and killed. The "context" of those shows is to bring in advertising dollars. THAT to me is obscene.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
So a story about genital mutilation or child prostitution or child soldiers or genocide with related but non-explicit pix would be "porn"?
I don't think so. I think the Supreme Court drew a distinction with regards to fiction and animation.
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Huh? Non of these are fiction, and they are not animation. I don't know what planet you're living on. Hero, as far as I'm concerned you're on some kind of kinky personal power trip, and you abuse your job. I knew someone like you. The DOJ was very interested in him.
So a story about genital mutilation or child prostitution or child soldiers or genocide with related but non-explicit pix would be "porn"? - Signy
I don't think so. I think the Supreme Court drew a distinction with regards to fiction and animation.- Hero
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME