It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UK plans to block all porn in effort to 'protect children'

page: 5
34
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by loner007
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


So you think every parent should get net nanny but you wont allow the government to put in its own version to protect kids? and when they do you cry nanny state...jeez give me a break.


No, I think parents whom pay monthly for internet access should have their children forcably removed!

OF COURSE I am suggesting parents get net nanny, or one of the many free or pay content blockers out there. I don't want the government deciding to filter anything. If its illegal, fine, but if its "to protect little jonny"...thats moms job.

If you cant be responsible enough to control what your dealing with in your home...then perhaps its time to give the kids up..chances are your failing at alot of things as a parent.




posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy

Originally posted by SaturnFX


I do not have kids. .


this is all I needed to understand why you answered why you did.
edit on 19-12-2010 by Lil Drummerboy because: (no reason given)


Ahh, so if I did have kids, I would understand how its important to not be a parent then and how the government needs to raise my children for me?

I guess thats all I need to understand why you answer how you do.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rosha
Why should I have to pay to opt out? When its YOU who wants the porn not me? Shouldnt it be 'user pays' ?
The internet is not some birthright...its a service. its YOU who cannot control your child, not me. I didn't have a child, why should I be made to suffer because your an irresponsible parent whom will bring the porn and violence machine into your house, then complain of the porn and violence?



Why should 'everyone' pay to fulfill your need to jerk off?
They pay monthly for internet service. You pay monthly, I pay monthly, joe down the street pays monthly. if you dont want to have internet...stop paying. Pretty simple..jerk off.




Why shouldnt the mental soveriegnty and health of children be considered the highest social importance?
Because the people whom would fight for this bill are unfit parents anyhow. they are screwed no matter what.



Why should any child be exposed to pornography just because he wishes to use the public internet? Should it by that reasoning, be perfectly ok for porn films to be shown in public supermarkets and public libraries too, school grounds, cafes?
The places you speak of typically are already regulated with content blockers and monitors.
If you go to a place that is showing porn films...guess what, your in some XXX cinema...and guess what..kids aren't allowed there either.



Why is your personal sexual gratification and voyerism more important than our collective responsibility for all of our childrens safety and psychological wellbeing?
Fact...most children are molested by someone in their family..often a parent
Therefore, to protect our children...all parents should be removed from the homes and the state should raise children...its "for the children" afterall.
it is the responsible thing to do..can't argue away statistics...so tell you what...you can filter the net, when you agree to be locked up for 18 years after you have a child...after all..we want whats best for our little dumplings...
I mean, why is your personal freedom and enjoyment more important than our collective responsibility for all of our childrens safety and psychological well being?



Do you enjoy living in a society where 8 yr olds are now raping 4 yr olds? You think access or exposure to porn has nothing to do with this?
Rosha


Pity the 8 year old had no parents.
I wonder if he was raised by wolves or something.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Gnarly
 


..you've obviously are not one of the 1 in 7 victims of rape, or 1 in 3 victims of sexual abuse, never been one of the 1 in 2 groomed by a paedophile. Maybe you've just never seen the absolute crap being passed of as 'consentual sex' on the net and nor do you seem to have any idea the actual cycle of abuse and no insight into the intent and mechanisms behind the pornography industry itself.
I doubt you even truely realise what it is you are defending at all.

In any case, this isnt about restrictiing information or advice or lumping all sex into the "unhealthy" basket. This is about the abuse of sex... the abuse of sex for profit...the abuse of people for profit...the abuse of children...for profit...all happening under the banner of free speech.

This also isnt about your right to view porn..this measure doesnt even touch that. No one is attacking your right to view porn at all.
This measure only determines HOW you will exercise that right....and if you are such a responsible citizen intent of upholding citizens rights, I dont see what the problem is when this is just a case of accepting the *responsibility* that goes with that right.

Whats wrong exactly, with accepting repsonsibility for yourself and being aware of the wider consequences of your choices?

I respect your right to view porn..I would fight for that right for you even though I do not exercise it myself.

If however you are unwilling or choose not to be responsible for that right and its effects on others...that commitment of mine, changes.

I do not uphold your right to view porn over my childs right to remain free to determine the contents of his own mind and his mental and social safety. My kid vs your wank..there's no bet...I know where my responsibility lies.
If you are entitled to free speech..why aren't our kids? Free speech is free..of all coercion..including sexual coercion.


R.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Originally posted by SaturnFX


Because the people whom would fight for this bill are unfit parents anyhow. they are screwed no matter what.


I am fighting for it..and I am an absolutely fabulous present parent!




Fact...most children are molested by someone in their family..often a parent
Therefore, to protect our children...all parents should be removed from the homes and the state should raise children...its "for the children" afterall.
it is the responsible thing to do..can't argue away statistics...so tell you what...you can filter the net, when you agree to be locked up for 18 years after you have a child...after all..we want whats best for our little dumplings...
I mean, why is your personal freedom and enjoyment more important than our collective responsibility for all of our childrens safety and psychological well being?


You dont get it and I dont expect you to.
I have given up expecting rational thought and an interest in real social justice from all but a very few people here a long time ago. Just dont have the hide pleas, e to whinge in other forums about the decaying "state of society" when your not willing to put your neck on the line for anything other than your own self interest.

This isnt just about molestation and direct consequences of hyper sexualisation..it's evidence based science about the knock on effects of early sexaulisation to all of us..and the cost to all of our societies and our humanity as a whole. The abused abusing and abusing in kind. From rape and zoosex sites advertising freely to abuse laden parents buying g strings for 3 year olds...it all started somewhere..eventually we have to say stop where we CAN say stop..or go the way of the dodo. This isnt just 'for the children' its for all of us.

You are free to ignore the evidence that points to a lack of personal responsibility being a precursor for this spiral down state of our societies and the evidence that shows how that responsibility has been abdicated.
You are free to do that all you like..your NOT free and no one in our world is however, from the consequences of denying that responsibility...consequences that you as much as any abuse victim will live with forever.

Rule your house as you've chosen I supose.....its your life...your kids lives..your siblings and your countrymens lives not mine.

Mine, well until society grows up mine get comptuors in the lounge room, free and healthy open debates about what sex is and isnt...they get taught *respect* for their minds and bodies and the minds and bodies of others, not how to abuse them use them or prostitute them for anothers pleasure, and more, they get MY protection from the hyenas and jackles as is my obligation as a parent. Dont like that? Write a letter.

In supporting this inititive I am simply extending that personal responsibility outwards to embrace those kids that that like myself at their age, dont have mums or dads like me who are watching their backs and kicking ass for them. In defending OUR rights to freedom yes, I am willing to stand up to self centered pricks that are trying to demonize good sound judgements that will benefit many not just one.

Its a sad irony that defending and protecting children has become a social sin....that alone speaks volumes about why I will and do continue to do so.


dont like? sue me.


R

edit on 19-12-2010 by Rosha because: spell edit.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rosha
reply to post by Gnarly
 


..you've obviously are not one of the 1 in 7 victims of rape, or 1 in 3 victims of sexual abuse, never been one of the 1 in 2 groomed by a paedophile. Maybe you've just never seen the absolute crap being passed of as 'consentual sex' on the net and nor do you seem to have any idea the actual cycle of abuse and no insight into the intent and mechanisms behind the pornography industry itself.
I doubt you even truely realise what it is you are defending at all.

In any case, this isnt about restrictiing information or advice or lumping all sex into the "unhealthy" basket. This is about the abuse of sex... the abuse of sex for profit...the abuse of people for profit...the abuse of children...for profit...all happening under the banner of free speech.

This also isnt about your right to view porn..this measure doesnt even touch that. No one is attacking your right to view porn at all.
This measure only determines HOW you will exercise that right....and if you are such a responsible citizen intent of upholding citizens rights, I dont see what the problem is when this is just a case of accepting the *responsibility* that goes with that right.

Whats wrong exactly, with accepting repsonsibility for yourself and being aware of the wider consequences of your choices?

I respect your right to view porn..I would fight for that right for you even though I do not exercise it myself.

If however you are unwilling or choose not to be responsible for that right and its effects on others...that commitment of mine, changes.

I do not uphold your right to view porn over my childs right to remain free to determine the contents of his own mind and his mental and social safety. My kid vs your wank..there's no bet...I know where my responsibility lies.
If you are entitled to free speech..why aren't our kids? Free speech is free..of all coercion..including sexual coercion.


R.


First off, you have no ****ing idea who I am or what I have been through. Just to let you know, I've been the victim of multiple instances of either rape and sexual assault. I'm a guy, and it's only been guys who have done this to me. Yet, I'm still pretty normal. My sister has been raped a few times, and very food friends of mine have been raped. I know very well what the hell I'm talking about. Now that we know I'm actually talking from REAL LIFE EXPERIENCES, let's continue.

Where is the abuse you are talking about? From I know, from real life experiences, abuse happens physically, or at least towards someone. Porn on the internet isn't directed at ANYONE, so it can't be abusive, because itself can not abuse anyone. It's not a living object that can think. Because these directors and actors/resses want children to be abused or something? Nope, they don't want children to watch what they make either. They also apply with the laws, like you must be at least 18 to view this page.

If I have the right to look up porn on my computer, then forcing me to opt in is a violation of that right. I don't have to do anything to have free speech, do I? Or do I need to opt in to say what I think, because it could potentially be abusive to virgin ears?

Also, how is it coercion when YOU are the one who must find the images? No one is forcing you to get on the internet, use a browser that doesn't have any security options, to use a site that has an unchecked parental block, or to even click on the images to see them in full detail. If any kid is looking at porn, he/she is doing so illegally. So, if your kid is viewing porn, he/she is committing a crime, and should take the responsibility of committing such an act. What's wrong with that?
edit on 19-12-2010 by Gnarly because: Grammar Nazi.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Excellent replies, good job.

Very logical and sensible you are.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Rosha
 





This isnt just about molestation and direct consequences of hyper sexualisation..it's evidence based science about the knock on effects of early sexaulisation to all of us..and the cost to all of our societies and our humanity as a whole. The abused abusing and abusing in kind. From rape and zoosex sites advertising freely to abuse laden parents buying g strings for 3 year olds...it all started somewhere..eventually we have to say stop..or go the way of the dodo. This isnt just 'for the children' its for all of us.


Where are your sources? I believe I have asked already. I want to see some real proof, not just some poorly written article, or your own thoughts. I want links, and actual data.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Sorry delete.
edit on 19-12-2010 by _Phoenix_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
I'm an American and have no problems in admitting that I am not overly proud of the way our country is run, but it seems like there has been some serious censorship issues as of late and a lot of it seems to be coming from Europe. I have to admit that I for one do not trust the EU. Any type of power that has that much control over that much of an area is trouble in my opinion. However I have to say that it seems Google has a big hand in censorship lately as well.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by justwokeup
Actually the porn industry will love this, the internet is killing them. Think of the DVD sales if the internet is locked down.

I'm in a cynical mood today :-)

Maybe that's what it is lol.

Just look at the money the drug business is making now.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by _Phoenix_
 


You could just bypass the blocks they might put in place and not opt in to anything and you can still drive around searching for open access points, no one can stop you doing that.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Yes. Sure. Let's refuse to let children see how they all got here...
Of course, I'm being a bit facetious: some of the more kinky fetishes don't result in birth.

But every single one of us human beings pee, poop, get naked, and eventually-- hopefully--boink.
Strange that the very things we ALL do are the very things we aren't allowed to see or talk about.

That said, we can take societal precautions.
But can we please remember that this world is full of grown-ups, too?
I get tired of having to filter everything through a child-appropriate approval panel.
edit on 19-12-2010 by spacegod because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 10:44 PM
link   
thanks for the find ... interesting push from the EU.
Oddly enough, when i need to use a 'proxy' or some other go around on the net, i usually consult my grandchild ... wonder if the politicians are consulting the children -- who are likely, already designing a new access path as we discuss closing this one.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Afte reading some of the replies, I'm going to have to comment beyond, "Don't take away my pr0n". This is after all one of the more retarded things I've ever heard of.

First of all, you, even if you're a parent, don't have the right to inconvenience everyone else, simply because you have a fetisch for government Internet censorship. Justify it all you want, but even kids are not a viable reason for censorship, no matter how much you wish it to be so. And don't give me the, "Do you have kids" bullcrap. I can raise kids without having to rely on government censorship to do it.

Second of all, as many have already pointed out, there are better alternatives to this, such as NetNanny. I can't think of any conceivable reason why you would choose to let the government censor your Internet instead of doing it yourself. The only possible reasons I can think of is stupidity and/or laziness.

Thirdly, if you don't understand the difference between NetNanny and government censorship, then you're not worth debating anyway. NetNanny is a filter program that you can remove at any time you see fit. Government censorship is something you cannot affect, and once you've gone down that path, there is NO going back.

Fourth, this is exactly how it starts. We start by censoring porn from those who shouldn't have to view it. Pretty soon other objectional content will be censored as well, such as political extremes. And then, the fringes of the political spectrum grow closer and closer to each other - broadening the definition of political extreme. All of a sudden, you have complete and utter Internet censorship.

The idea of censoring the Internet is retarded in it's most basic form. It never works, it's always misused, and it's always the wrong people who pay for it.

Now if you want to sacrifice that just to keep your kid from watching porn, then I strongly suggest you move to China. Because we in the Western world have a different culture than that. Just because you're too damn lazy to install a filter program on your own computer to protect your child, and would turn to the government to do it for you instead, doesn't mean you have the right to make that decision for everyone else. Your children are not a viable argument for internet censorship! That's the kind of thinking I expect from pretentious puritan bastards, not ATS members.
edit on 19-12-2010 by David_Reale because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Internet censorship in china = fail
The size of the Internet police in china is rumored at more than 50,000
there are a number of web proxies that are designed to beat censorship.

Internet censorship in iran =fail

Internet censorship of child porn in a large number of countries =fail

Internet censorship in North Korea= works because there is no Internet except for the government

There are a number of web proxies that are designed to beat censorship.
Psiphon is a web proxy designed to help Internet users securely bypass the content-filtering systems used to censor the internet by governments in places like China, North Korea, Iran, Myanmar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Vietnam, Pakistan and others. Psiphon was originally developed by the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto, building upon previous generations of web proxy software systems, such as the "SafeWeb" and "Anonymizer" systems.
en.wikipedia.org...

The only countries where censorship works are countries without Internet or countries with only state owned ISPs and there are still small holes in state run ISPs.

With the high capacity flash drives today people can still smuggle information across borders. with the border between the UK and EU so open censorship would be a joke. Since this does not make possession of porn illegal just blocks internet porn sites.
Anyone wanting to bypass could lease servers in France and set them up as proxy servers and charge a fee for people to use them for surfing porn.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gnarly
reply to post by Rosha
 





This isnt just about molestation and direct consequences of hyper sexualisation..it's evidence based science about the knock on effects of early sexaulisation to all of us..and the cost to all of our societies and our humanity as a whole. The abused abusing and abusing in kind. From rape and zoosex sites advertising freely to abuse laden parents buying g strings for 3 year olds...it all started somewhere..eventually we have to say stop..or go the way of the dodo. This isnt just 'for the children' its for all of us.


Where are your sources? I believe I have asked already. I want to see some real proof, not just some poorly written article, or your own thoughts. I want links, and actual data.




I didnt respond to you because as I wrote, this isnt an issue of censorship or even about the morality of porn per say- it is about changing how people ACCESS porn..thats all..the rest ' omg they're taking away my freedom' is hype and fear mongering....as I wrote..this proposal would actually give YOU and everyone else BACK a freedom already stolen!


Yes though, and IMO, it is is about wider social consequences and a lack of responsibility and it is also about upholding childrens' rights and children DO have rights - you get that dont you?

Google any point I made in my post and you will find a hundred articles thesis and diatribes on the issue for and against censoring porn, but very few on THIS topic which is - OPTING IN rather than OPTING OUT.

The research hasnt been done on that topic..on THIS topic yet and wont ever if people like you dont give it a chance to get off the ground to SEE the alternative in action! Its easy to win an argument when you dont let the other side have a voice or chance to proove itself!

As for the rest..the other debate thats not on topic...well, I am not obliged to educate you to what is an obvious social problem to those who can read or see...and a non existent one to those who dont care, dont want to know or think they live in vaccumes where conseqences dont apply to them or only appy to them... but here, I'll do your work for you this one time...

Go have a read about what KIDS themselves are saying about it and while yor on that subject go read the charter of Human Rights for Children its all there every obligation we as ADULTS are currently failing to meet:

Young Media Australia works WITH children to find out what THEY want...and this was their last report:

www.youngmedia.org.au...

Children should not be exposed to exploitative and superficial
representations of teen and adult sexuality in the media at times and in
environments where they have every right to be.


(And the internet is such an environment!)

more:

YMA finds children are also sexualised by media images of adult sexuality
which are inappropriately placed in spaces which children frequent – for
example day time TV music video shows, outdoor billboards, the Internet.
YMA has read and endorses the submission sent to this Inquiry from Julie
Gale of Kf2bK Kids Free to be Kids. YMA is acting in partnership with Kf2bK
on the issue of the sexualisation of children in the media.
Kf2bK has supplied to this Inquiry many examples of media and product
content which portrays children in sexualised ways, and which exposes
children to highly explicit portrayals of adult sexuality.
The beneficiaries of such sexualisation are not children and their families.
They are the publishers and distributors of such media.



“Commercial forces turn children into consumers. This is bad enough when
compromises health by encouraging them to consume bad food, cigarettes
and alcohol. But when commercial forces turn children into sexualised
commodities, it corrodes the core of the developing child and makes them
more vulnerable to exploitation.”
Prof Dorothy Scott, Director, Australian Centre for Child Protection,
University of South Australia
“Child development is about play, exploration and experimentation.
Child sexual development is not different. When we expose a child to
sexual images and messages beyond their years, they don’t
understand this image/message and will seek to understand it
through play. This undoubtedly leads to sexual play and behaviours
in children outside of normal development.”
Lisa Cox , psychologist and child protection specialist,


More:

Sex and Children: Corporate paedophillia:
www.tai.org.au...


More:


APA documents on the sexualisation of girls:
www.apa.org...



More to MY moral point - what if it was YOUR daughter banging five guys and getting pissed on and facials for fun and profit..what then? What if it was your son a bunch of dickheads were jacking into?...your wife getting done on some video by 100 blokes in a race to see how many guys she could # to brake some sick record? Or maybe your mother frragging some guy young enough to be your son?...How would YOU feel if YOUR son or daughter was jerking off to that? Is that really how you want your kids to know sex? Themselves?


Really?
You DONT find a problem with it?
Do you care?
Does it matter?

Who cares right...its not hurting anyone...
www.suite101.com...

The girls are just doing it because they like sex huh..
jiv.sagepub.com...

How would you feel if you KNEW for certain that many dare I say most women in the porn industry are sex abuse victims who are self harming and your click on that site is only adding to the original abusers damage of that person so by proxy you are aiding and abetting a sex offender?

Doesnt matter right...its only sex.,.doesnt hurt anyone and there's no wider consequences right?
socyberty.com...

--

good luck with that.



Rosha



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by David_Reale
Afte reading some of the replies, I'm going to have to comment beyond, "Don't take away my pr0n". This is after all one of the more retarded things I've ever heard of.


Great post !
Except this issue ISNT about CENSORING anything!

It is changing ***the means of access*** to that material....everything will still be there FREELY ACCESSABLE and UNCENSORED in all its gory glory for you to OPT IN and ENJOY at your leisure!


What is the problem with THAT?

How is THAT censorship?


You and your partner dont have sex in front of children do you? No? You close the door right?
Thats sensible and probably a good thing to do right?

Well THAT IS ALL this proposal is doing. Closing the door.

YOU can open the damn door anytime YOU want to! No one is stopping you!
But its YOU CHOOSING to do that..non one else need suffer or bear the consequence of YOUR freely made choice!

Where is the problem?

Honestly..I dont get it or see it.
If they were censoring porn or whatever Id be fighting back too...I just dont get it..they're not..they're just closing the door.



R




edit on 19-12-2010 by Rosha because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-12-2010 by Rosha because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 11:52 PM
link   
I have given up expecting rational thought and an interest in real social justice from all but a very few people here a long time ago.
You are not speaking of social justice at all
You are speaking of social control. Contrary to popular belief, you are not given a child...you choose to make one, and you choose to keep the baby full term
You choose to raise it.
Social justice is NOT having others raise it for you, nor is it denying rights or putting all sorts of hoops everyone has to jump through out of your -choice-
Being a parent is a bitch, sure..and its something you chose to be. If you cannot be a good parent and monitor what your child watches, reads, talks to, etc...then perhaps its time to consider if being a parent is your cup of tea..


Just dont have the hide pleas, e to whinge in other forums about the decaying "state of society" when your not willing to put your neck on the line for anything other than your own self interest.
My self interest is for a person whom chooses something to be responsible for what they choose verses try and make everything change around them to make it slightly easier for them.



This isnt just about molestation and direct consequences of hyper sexualisation..it's evidence based science about the knock on effects of early sexaulisation to all of us..and the cost to all of our societies and our humanity as a whole. The abused abusing and abusing in kind. From rape and zoosex sites advertising freely to abuse laden parents buying g strings for 3 year olds...it all started somewhere..eventually we have to say stop where we CAN say stop..or go the way of the dodo. This isnt just 'for the children' its for all of us.
zoosex? anyhow...thats all a distraction from the point. The playboy magazine when it first came out was hailed as the epic end of society...thats it, game over..we will all be raging pervs in 20 years.
Well, that didn't happen.
And even going back before then, with the old school turn of the century nickelodian picture machines with the porn, that was considered the civilization ending thing...yep...that never happened either
Now the new argument...the internet is going to make everyone beastiality loving homosexual rapists...

I don't buy it.


You are free to ignore the evidence that points to a lack of personal responsibility being a precursor for this spiral down state of our societies and the evidence that shows how that responsibility has been abdicated.
You are free to do that all you like..your NOT free and no one in our world is however, from the consequences of denying that responsibility...consequences that you as much as any abuse victim will live with forever.
What evidence are you talking about? Your opinion is not evidence. What is seen on the television is not a spike in any sex crime...it is society actually reporting sex crimes now. you think that pre-internet, people didn't get raped? heh...no...their was if not equal, then alot more sex related crimes in our past...but it was brushed under the carpet, dismissed, and ultimately ignored. There hasn't been a safer time in society to raise a kid than now...and that includes the good ole 50s when such things were simply not discussed (even though it was commonplace)



Rule your house as you've chosen I supose.....its your life...your kids lives..your siblings and your countrymens lives not mine.
When I was responsible for children (was a stepdad), we had a tight control on the media the house had. We had content control on the computer, and there was no cable past watershed. I didn't ask everyone around me to please stop finding their own happiness in whatever they did..I took care of my own and that was that.



Mine, well until society grows up mine get comptuors in the lounge room, free and healthy open debates about what sex is and isnt...they get taught *respect* for their minds and bodies and the minds and bodies of others, not how to abuse them use them or prostitute them for anothers pleasure, and more, they get MY protection from the hyenas and jackles as is my obligation as a parent. Dont like that? Write a letter.
aka...parenting...good for you. Glad you actually see a role for yourself in your kids life.


In supporting this inititive I am simply extending that personal responsibility outwards to embrace those kids that that like myself at their age, dont have mums or dads like me who are watching their backs and kicking ass for them.
No, in supporting this, you are saying that no parent is up to par as you are...that you know what is best for other peoples children, and that everyone should be made to suffer because of what you deem is morally objectionable. Society control...or actually, the absolute opposite of social justice.

If you truely want to help the "kids in need", then I would suggest spending time getting your word out about how parents need to step up.
Because if junior isn't back there wanking to the latest paris hilton video due to censorship control, he will probably be over his friends house who did have parents opt in doing the same thing...the only way to control it is to go into full censorship mode..first the sex, then the violence, then the political dissidence websites (like this), etc. Social justice my arse...thats social engineering.



In defending OUR rights to freedom yes, I am willing to stand up to self centered pricks that are trying to demonize good sound judgements that will benefit many not just one.
No, its shining a light on kneejerk judgement because someone tossed the magic 3 words in "for the children". People will give up their right to free speech if someone can twist that into a for the children meme.

The good is to be a parent...and thats that.



Its a sad irony that defending and protecting children has become a social sin....that alone speaks volumes about why I will and do continue to do so.
I have seen nothing that is "protecting children"...however, I do see something being pushed to "enforce stateism over familys decision...and a blatantly obvious slipperly slope "for the children". Frankly, as a parent, you should feel insulted that such measures are being taken because they are pretending to care for children.




dont like? sue me.

I respect your view. I simply see it wildly different because I am not easily kneejerk responding to the "for the children" meme.
It is the new religion, the new way to bring a iron grip slowly around any and all information. There is always an elegant argument to be made on why yet another liberty is regulated, then ultimately removed from society.

and so you don't think I am some far right wing nutjob...couldn't be further from the truth..I am a progressive liberal whom is interested in social justice...but as I said...this is certainly not social justice...this is conditioning, control, and destruction.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX


I respect your view. I simply see it wildly different because I am not easily kneejerk responding to the "for the children" meme.
It is the new religion, the new way to bring a iron grip slowly around any and all information. There is always an elegant argument to be made on why yet another liberty is regulated, then ultimately removed from society.

and so you don't think I am some far right wing nutjob...couldn't be further from the truth..I am a progressive liberal whom is interested in social justice...but as I said...this is certainly not social justice...this is conditioning, control, and destruction.



Look...If it were about actual censorship I would agree with you but it is not about that in THIS situation. This proposal actually avoids that very well. Its actually a good idea.

As I said in my last...its simply closing the bedroom door...not restricting YOUR freedom or witholding ANYTHING from you the adult making a conscious choice to view anything behind that door. Its not censoring anything behind that door either.

I dont see the problem with that at all. Its respectful...and yes, imo..parent or not...its the right thing to do, to BE responsible for your own choices and limit their negative impact on others.




R

edit on 20-12-2010 by Rosha because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join