Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by waterpie
First of all, I don't understand the way by which you use the term "legality". It seems to me that "legal" is whatever we may
choose.
Clearly you don't understand because you don't understand legality. Personal moral opinions are based on several things depending on the way you
were raised, your religion, etc. Legality focuses on making laws that do not conflict with civil rights clauses.
Clearly if you cut what I said in halve, it is easier for you. I gave an example, that at some time in the past, it was legal to own slaves. Supposing
that we all agree that that is not very nice and good and moral, I said that "legal" is just what we choose.
that viewing child porn does not fuel the industry, is not harmful to society, and is not linked to child abuse. So far it would seem the exact
opposite is true of child porn.
I agree with your reasoning, but I disagree with your conclusion.
It does not fuel the "industry". What industry? I want to send them money, where are they?
And if there is an "industry" and I can send them money, then surely they can be caught while collecting.
Just viewing an image cannot be harmful to society. (Philosophically, being more information, and accepting that information is good, it is actually
by definition better for society.)
It can only be bad for society if it is linked/causes child abuse. That doesn't make any sense.
Why don't action films cause people to steal,kill,kidnap, etc? I asked that again, and you didn't answer. If you were tricked to follow a link, and
you were exposed (without wanting) to cp, would that exposure make you more prone to do child abuse?
I don't agree that seeing something, necessarily fuels its creation.
You don't have to agree, but with child porn this has clearly been the case.
[edit on 12-12-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]
"Clearly"? I saw a reference from the article, searched for it with "critic" in google and by browsing one of the first links:
66.102.1.104...:ZAWGmwmqkloJ:www.colorado.edu/Research/cspv/publications/papers/pdf/CSPV-005.pdf+Nation
al+Juvenile+Online+Victimization+Study+critic
"
The result is an unusual degree ofconsensus despite a
terribly weak empirical foundation.
...
Such a state of affairs is completely understandable given political pressure to protect society.
...
Overwhelmed by
the need to react quickly, experimental research took a back seat, a position it maintains to this day
...
Furthermore, the
Church of Scientology, cleverly concealed as the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste,
has not only interfered with the conduct of offender research
...
For males under age 21 the range is 92,000-130,000...annual estimates of, say, rape have been based on as few as 62
...
When data on assaults are gathered in the context of a “crime survey,” fewer assaults are reported than when the interview also includes items
about attitudes, lifestyle, and prosocial behavior (Mihalic & Elliott, 1995). These investigators surmise that many acts ofdomestic violence or
aggression are not perceived by respondents as criminal.
...
The study sample was hardly representative of the general adolescent population, but the findings do suggest that juveniles are responsible for a very
significant proportion of child molestations
...
Since no one really knows how much rape is actually perpetrated by juveniles (or adults for that matter), it is impossible to say with any certainty
what the odds are of being arrested.
...
There have been only four studies that have addressed the association between pornography use and
sexual aggression among teens
...
"
I don't have the time for more, but that is not "clearly".