Anti gay Lawyer arrested on child porn charges.

[festive1]

Your victim argument doesn't hold as strong as you think it does for danish child porn. All of the "victims" were above the legal age of consent in denmark at the time, and I understand the bulk was underage sex between two underage people, not an underage person and an adult as you're imagining. The age of consent in Australia is 16, but the law states that performers in porn must be at least 18+. Why the arbitrary discrepancy?

I don't know the exact reasoning, but it may have to do with the American porn industry, where the legal age for performing in a porno is 18. So as not to cause international confusion, they decided to keep it at one age, 18. Or perhaps they consider a 16 year old as being able to consent to sex, a 16 year old may not fully understand the ramifications of making porn until they are a little older.

BTW you missed my argument. The BDSM material "legal in the USA" is illegal in Australia, the UK and most other places, when is the USA going to get their ass in gear and stop the extremely obscene material that depicts rape torture and pain instead of depicting consensual sex? I thought porn is supposed to depict only consensual sex, so why does the USA think it's okay to depict non-consensual sex in porn?

Because, even though it's a depiction of non-consensual sex, there is a contract that exists, that all parties have signed giving consent.

Oh and as if the USA isn't totally hypocritical by banning child porn but allowing porn to depict rape? By allowing extreme pornography and criminalizing prostitution? By being so out of step with the rest of the civilized world on these issues!

No one is saying the US is perfect. Personally, I would like prostitution to be legal and regulated, for the safety of the prostitutes and johns. Banning child porn while allowing porn that depicts rape are two very different things. A child is a victim. The person being "raped" on film has actually given consent to participate, something that a child cannot do.

You think I'm trying to defend her - I'm not. I think people who are overtly anti-gay without having the exact same attitude to all "fornication" are in err. I think it's ridiculous to stigmatise homosexuality over pre-material sex, promiscuity, rape, adultery, bestiality, etc, instead of seeing them all as an equal sin.

Homosexuality does not equate to rape, bestiality, child porn or pedophilia. Homosexuality is no different than heterosexuality in terms of morality. Pre-marital sex, promiscuity, adultery... There is nothing wrong with these behaviors, they should not be punished in a court of law. Sure an adulterer is an ass, but that is related to the relationship they were in before cheating. It's the cheating, not the sex, that is distasteful.

Fine, if that's the case then tell the USA to decriminalize prostitution as well, because they are so out of line with the rest of the civilized world it makes them look like 18th century barbarians.

Agreed.

So the paedophiles who watch child-porn are engaging in their own fantasy too, how is their watching the material any worse than those who engage in "rape fantasy"?

Because those watching the rape porn are hopefully aware that it isn't a real rape, rather a film depicting a rape occurring between two consenting adults. A pedophile watching child porn is doing so at the expense of a child being harmed.

[Zen Badger]

You have nothing and you keep trying to deflect the thread away from the vile hypocrisy of your religion.

I don't respond to straw mans, sorry. I live in the real world.

Yeah, whatever pal.

You have no actual counter argument so you are seeking to change the argument to something entirely irrelevant.

And since your jesus never spoke against homosexuality, you are also a hypocrite for calling it a sin.

[KichigaiNeko]

Seems to be his modus operandi Zen...Daniel is quite useless??

A reflection of what his god/deity will tolerate?

[genkaus]

Your victim argument doesn't hold as strong as you think it does for danish child porn. All of the "victims" were above the legal age of consent in denmark at the time, and I understand the bulk was underage sex between two underage people, not an underage person and an adult as you're imagining. The age of consent in Australia is 16, but the law states that performers in porn must be at least 18+. Why the arbitrary discrepancy?

Obviously, never having actually seen the Danish child porn, I wouldn't know as much about it as you do.

At what age does a person become mature enough to be considered to have consent willingly? Some are mature enough at 15, others not even at 25. The line drawn is arbitrary, but one is necessary and since we don't know of any definite criteria upon which to draw it, different countries choose different "arbitrary" lines.

I support the 18 yrs age line because that is the age at which an average person graduates high school and either goes to college or enters the work-force. In other words if they can become independent in all the other ways at that age, then they should be deemed ready to consent to sex. However, I'm also amenable to reducing the said age by 2-3 yrs if arguments such as "they become mature enough before actually leaving the house". As a matter of fact, I'm also open to issuing special "sex-permits" to the under-age who believe they are mature enough for sex (either with an adult or as a member of porn industry) and are willing to prove their position in front of an objective committee - though even I can see that that is a pipe dream.

Incidentally, what's the position on sexual consent among emancipated minors in US?

BTW you missed my argument. The BDSM material "legal in the USA" is illegal in Australia, the UK and most other places, when is the USA going to get their ass in gear and stop the extremely obscene material that depicts rape torture and pain instead of depicting consensual sex? I thought porn is supposed to depict only consensual sex, so why does the USA think it's okay to depict non-consensual sex in porn?

Why would you assume something so stupid? Porn is supposed to depict sex - of any kind. As for US, I hope it never bans the BDSM or rape porn. I hope that other countries follow its lead and make it legal.

Why does USA think its okay to depict non-consensual sex in porn? Because contrary to the depiction, the sex is actually very much consensual.

Oh and as if the USA isn't totally hypocritical by banning child porn but allowing porn to depict rape? By allowing extreme pornography and criminalizing prostitution? By being so out of step with the rest of the civilized world on these issues!

Yes, very hypocritical. They certainly should legalize prostitution.

You think I'm trying to defend her - I'm not. I think people who are overtly anti-gay without having the exact same attitude to all "fornication" are in err. I think it's ridiculous to stigmatise homosexuality over pre-material sex, promiscuity, rape, adultery, bestiality, etc, instead of seeing them all as an equal sin.

Add "married sex" to the list and then you can say what you actually do want to say - all sex is sinful.

Fine, if that's the case then tell the USA to decriminalize prostitution as well, because they are so out of line with the rest of the civilized world it makes them look like 18th century barbarians.

You write the petition, I will get the signatures.

So the paedophiles who watch child-porn are engaging in their own fantasy too, how is their watching the material any worse than those who engage in "rape fantasy"?

Its not "their watching" that is worse, "the making" of the porn that is.

[Aractus]

Really? You don't undertand that the 'material' paedo's watch, had to come from victimizing a child? How odd that you in your vaunted intelligence can't see that.

It didn't, it came from Denmark and was produced LEGALLY! Stop telling me that it depicts a CRIME because if it did it wouldn't have been produced LEGALLY. All your doing is calling it out for the stigma you have of it. Yes it's awful, but you can't hide behind the "victim" argument if both parties in a sex act are 12 years old can you? Which of them is the victim then? What about when they're both 17?

Until 1980 Denmark didn't draw a line in the sand as to how old someone had to be in pornography, as of 1980 they now have to be 18 years old or older (same as most of the world now). Now you can put it down to ignorance and inexperience (how could they have known in 1969 the ramifications of totally legalizing pornography without any restrictions?) But claiming the victim argument is you taking the "moral high ground" on this issue.

We're not talking about the material that paedophiles produce depicting acts with their victims, we're talking about Denmark, they started the problem of child porn, their material has been digitally scanned and distributed now for 40+ years. It was a booming industry, you'll unfortunately never be able to destroy what it created.

Presently the USA is doing what Denmark did, producing highly offensive sexual material. Beastiality is less offensive then what the USA is producing these days. They're giving the whole world the problem, just like Denmark gave the whole world the problem of child porn. Until they made it it didn't exist, same thing with the USA and extreme BDSM.

[festive1]

How about this: If you don't like extreme BDSM, you don't watch it?

[KichigaiNeko]

How about this: If you don't like extreme BDSM, you don't watch it?

But Daniel canna help his'elf... most religious are like that...something about their wonderful "World Vieew"?

[LastPoet]

It didn't, it came from Denmark and was produced LEGALLY! Stop telling me that it depicts a CRIME because if it did it wouldn't have been produced LEGALLY. All your doing is calling it out for the stigma you have of it. Yes it's awful, but you can't hide behind the "victim" argument if both parties in a sex act are 12 years old can you? Which of them is the victim then? What about when they're both 17

Keep spinning Daniboy, moving goal posts around only show your inability to acknowledge your limitations. It is a crime, it is supported by mental technicians around the world as harmfull to children. The fact that Danish laws at the time didn't account for child pornography doesn't give your argument any more weight. If two 12 year old children are filmed having sex they are both the victims, and the persons that distribute those videos are accountable. Two 12 y.o. children having sex per se is not a crime, but filming them and distributing it is, simply because they can't give consent on that.

Until 1980 Denmark didn't draw a line in the sand as to how old someone had to be in pornography, as of 1980 they now have to be 18 years old or older (same as most of the world now). Now you can put it down to ignorance and inexperience (how could they have known in 1969 the ramifications of totally legalizing pornography without any restrictions?) But claiming the victim argument is you taking the "moral high ground" on this issue.

It is no moral high ground you dumb fuck, it is protecting a child from harm, harm that has been shown to exist by psychiatric consensus everywhere, or are you going to pretend to know more than they on this subject too?

The rest of your post is just a chain of non sequiturs, ending with a nice old slippery slope. You are willing to go through great lenghts to avoid acknowledging that you have no reasoning behind the bullshit you spew forth, and try to project into me your own prejudices, something you have done in numerous posts. All you do is dodging, changing subjects and accuse others of the flaws you possess yourself, instead of sticking to the point, gracefully running away from the responsability of the things you say (examples? You equating pre-marital sex to rape, for instance).

[TaraJo]

1) The reason we're mentioning the story is because of the absurd amount of hipocracy involved with this woman.

Oh and as if the USA isn't totally hypocritical by banning child porn but allowing porn to depict rape? By allowing extreme pornography and criminalizing prostitution? By being so out of step with the rest of the civilized world on these issues!

I have little to no problem with the act of possessing child porn, but I have a problem with the children who were hurt in the production of child pornography. Fact is, if you have a thing for little kids but you can get your rocks off in a way that doesn't hurt anyone, I'm cool with it. Hell, I know of websites you can go to for child porn cartoons which, by the way, is perfectly legal because you can't hurt drawings. And, yes, I do think it's hipocritical to ban prostitution but keep a lot of other forms of questionable sex legal, but I believe we've already had this discussion on these forums and most everyone here feels like prostitution should be legal.

She's fighting a moral crusade because, somehow, homosexuals and abortion are damaging our nation's morals, but she's participating in kiddy porn. How is anyone supposed to take her seriously when she's trying to inject her moral code as law when that moral code includes kiddy porn?

You think I'm trying to defend her - I'm not. I think people who are overtly anti-gay without having the exact same attitude to all "fornication" are in err. I think it's ridiculous to stigmatise homosexuality over pre-material sex, promiscuity, rape, adultery, bestiality, etc, instead of seeing them all as an equal sin.

Then have her re-read Matthew 7: 1-5. Honestly, I'm following her holy book better than she is, because while she condemns people for not living up to a sexual morality that she can't even live up to herself, I'm living well within Matthew 7:2 which says, specifically, "in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." My sexual ethics pretty much say as long as everyone involved gives their informed consent, anything you do is good to go. So far, I've lived up to the same moral code I'm asking of others.

How's that sound, Danny boy? I'm living up to the ethics of the Bible better than people who think of it as a holy book!

2) As for how child porn is worse than regular porn, my rule for sexuality is that anything consenting adults want to do amongst themselves is fair game.

Fine, if that's the case then tell the USA to decriminalize prostitution as well, because they are so out of line with the rest of the civilized world it makes them look like 18th century barbarians.

[/quote]

You're right, I do think prostitution should be decriminalized. This makes it subject to taxation (which would lessen the load on other businesses) and regulation (which would just about eliminate underage prostitution and a lot of other sex crimes).

As for comparing it to other forms of 'gonzo' porn, let's take a look: rape, I'm cool with rape fantasy, as long as the porn involves people who are participating in that fantasy of their own free will.

So the paedophiles who watch child-porn are engaging in their own fantasy too, how is their watching the material any worse than those who engage in "rape fantasy"?

If you can find a way to fulfill your fantasy without hurting anyone else, I'm cool with it. Generally, child porn involves sexual abuse of children and that's the part I have a problem with. But there are other sexual aids you can use that don't hurt anyone. Cartoons or drawings can work and so can written word. Both of those are suggestions that can be used that don't involve sexually abusing anyone.

[Dee Dee Ramone]

Movie spoiler and off-topic!

Anybody familair with this movie 'Boy with the stryped pyamas'? I remember reading that the director had problems shooting the end because naked children and adults are included. It's a goddamn gas chamber scene.

Why the well should we censor naked children (in a non-sexual content orcourse) out of movies? Maybe we also should censor dead bodies because of necrophilia?