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.

 

Online pornography to be blocked by default, PM to announce

page: 11
39
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:13 PM
link   
By denying young people access to porn websites, wouldn't you create another problem in that kids being kids will start using Tor and surfing the deep web to get their porn, thus exposing them to even worse material and images than they would ever seen from typing "porn" into Google?

It all ultimately comes down to parents. Incompetent parents who are too lazy to parent their children want the government to do it for them, interfering the freedoms of every citizen in the country in the process.




posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by alysha.angel
im talking about BOTH GENDERS .. im talking about the preconvieved notions that porn inflicks on our youth that we as parents cant control.

for example young men have it in their heads that all women reach an orgasm every time sex happens which is simply not true . it gives preformence anxeity and lessons their worthlessor inflates their egos big time to the point that no real woman is good enough for them unless shes a size 0 and does everything that happens in those misguided show cases ..

parents can nott watch their teenagers 247 due to jobs housework etc.. and teenagers do lie about their age in order to watch this stuff.. especially the boys ...

it also aids in rape on a mass scale .. so hence i rest my case
edit on 22/7/13 by alysha.angel because: (no reason given)


It doesn't aid in rape, if you want to go by the statistics it actually lowers rape.

And size 0 women are pretty uncommon in porn. Females in porn tend to be quite curvy, if anything.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by RedDragon
 


I am referring to (pornography) nothing else...I have stated my opinion...like it; don't like it...it is what I think.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Never mind
edit on 7/22/13 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocker2013
 


Very angry answer to my post, in British law we have the concept of duty of care, if I walk down a street and see a manhole cover is removed but do nothing about it then technically I share liability for not fixing the problem if it was within my ability to so do when someone else falls down that manhole then I am in part responsible in theory and technically anyway though I have heard of only a few prosecutions and they were against company's not individual's.
Adult material should be policed more effectively though I am sure you will agree that shutting this out is like trying to kill a cockroach with a feather, it will always be there still if it in any way protects children then I am in principle for it so we will have to wait and see what is implemented if anything.
Sadly the paedophiles have one thing that sets them apart from normal morally driven human beings and that is a lack of empathy also they find a child attractive which to my mind and emotions is offensive and alien, maybe we should treat them as mentally ill but personally I just want them out of society entirely.

SO they do have this duty but it has never been forced upon them and the nature of the net is as you correctly point out physically impossible to prevent people whom know how from working around any block they put up.
If Cameron really wanted to stop this he should have talks with the leaders of the nations were this type of material is legally stored on servers.

Sorry to rattle your cage but lets keep this on the subject,. Personally though I believe it to be an unworkable approach in the short term.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocker2013
 


I stated my opinion on the topic of this thread only; you can certainly disagree with me; but insulting me personally is really uncalled for..and really shows something about you.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Some of people who are advocating for such government protections clearly lack agency and likely do not feel they have the power to block pornography from their computers. There is plenty of software out there that serves this very purpose.

Also I find it ironic that some of the people (mostly women) who want to 'help' women have variously claimed that all intelligent women support their own point of view (as if all intelligent women have the same opinion, or as if women who disagree are not intelligent). Well, you're not actually helping women there. It also makes me think your opinions are very poorly considered which reflects badly on yourself.

While we're at it, why don't be ban violence too from the media too. Perhaps because it's not gendered (actually most violence is male on male, and is normalized behaviour) it matters less or is more transparent to people? I think violence is far too accepted in society, as compared to say, two adults having consensual sex. Question is, how to be discourage the normalization of violence without blatant censorship?

EDITED: Revised position.
edit on 22/7/13 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by caladonea
reply to post by RedDragon
 


I am referring to (pornography) nothing else...I have stated my opinion...like it; don't like it...it is what I think.


And there are things that you like that other people don't.. If you can force your likes/ morals onto other people, why can't everyone else?

Many people don't like conspiracy theories and have as legitimate moral qualms about them as you do about porn.. Why shouldn't they able to force you to opt-in to conspiracy speech and put you on a national list?

Many people don't like religion and have as legitimate moral qualms about it as you do about porn.. Why shouldn't they be able to force religious people to opt-in for access to religious speech? Why shouldn't religious people be put on a national list?

After all, it is what other people think.
edit on 7/22/13 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by alysha.angel
 


without an outlet sex crimes will shoot up.

age old story. prohibit prostitution and rapes increase. punish masterbation and violent sex crimes will increase.

we are by nature animals." sane and normal, proper and civilized " are just concepts. in reality we are just animals. cage mankind and you will have violent outbursts forever until we are free.

progressive agendas.......making the world crapy and unlivable at every turn...



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:24 PM
link   


Every household in the UK is to have pornography blocked by their internet provider unless they choose to receive it, David Cameron is to announce.
reply to post by beezzer
[more

It is a decision that is made at home " unless they choose to receive it"



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 


Not necessarily as there is porn then there is obscene and evil porn and there are those of us whom believe that it is harmful to society and we feel a sense of duty to try to protect not only our own and other children but also the other victims of an obscene trade, normal porn is made by two consenting adults that are happy to have it on the net but there is also the other type.
So how would you feel if it was you sister or daughter, or you friend whom was the victim.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by alysha.angel
 



im sorry but its too assesble to everyone. and kids lie about their ages all of the time.i agree with the prime minister

parental controls can be established to prevent that sort of material from being accessed without the government stepping in.

governments make terrible parents.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by LABTECH767
 


I agree about banning paedophilia, abuse, bestiality (and so on) as that is something that is extremely clear cut. Also I edited the post.
edit on 22/7/13 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by tadaman
progressive agendas.......making the world crapy and unlivable at every turn...

This is not progressive, this is the legislated morality agenda..arguably the religious agenda.

Progression would be giving all parents free versions of content blocker if they want it.


Now...since mating is a natural requirement of life, I do expect then that the PM will auto ban violence next...after all, I am far more worried about someone attacking me than winking at me...you learn such traits young, so it makes total sense to block any and all websites discussing violence, be it movies, games, books, etc.
If people want violent websites unblocked, all they have to do is request specifically for it...

nothing like a official list of all your at home perversions being made and held by some company.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by winofiend
 


You seem to miss the point about this. No parents appear to have asked Mr Cameron to suddenly decide to 'protect our children from pornography on the net. His Ministers decided that it would be a good boost to his lack of popularity with the people of the UK if he did, according to the Daily Mail. Also his Ministers have asked the providers if they would say that 'porn is set on default' regardless of the fact that there will be no change to porn availability! So you can float your boat as and when, booze and masturbate if you so feel the urge - no parent from the UK is putting your enjoyment at risk.

To find Cameron appearing to do something actually for the British public, is a first and I won't disagree with the idea of filtering the net for this one subject. I genuinely feel that some porn, eg snuff etc etc is strictly off limit for my Grand Child and I'm not naive to think that the child filters on the computer or should a national filter ever be possible will protect her well enough, especially if there are older kids there and they are curious.

Our freedom has already gone down the toilet with the government's spyware so I expect what anyone watches is already being neatly added to our files. I would wonder for how long it will be before our homes are monitored through something as simple as our tvs - we are looking at tv - they are looking at us. I dare say many of us will be getting rid of the bedroom tv.

I do wonder when we are all going to tell our governments they are going way beyond their remits and we want change and privacy back.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by RedDragon
 


Your sarcasm is duly noted...and I understand the point you are making.

However...I am referring to the one topic of this thread only... in my statements and nothing else.

You do make some good points though; food for thought!



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 


I agree with your sentiment, but from a conspiracy side of things, this has nothing to do with porn. This is more about putting the infrastructure in in place for Internet censorship, they're just using this as a soft approach by targeting a widely frowned upon topic.

I really didn't expect the people here to latch on to the fact that they're blocking porn more than the fact that they're blocking anything at all.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
Shouldn't this be a decision best made in the home instead of a de facto decision made by government?


Well, you know how it is. Big decisions like whether or not you can allow "bad" light to fall upon your eyes are best left to Big Brother.

Of course it is a decision that is best made by individuals. But the UK is a heavily collectivist society. That's the same reason they have cameras up their asses everywhere they go.

I'm sure this kind of thing isn't far away in other countries. They've been sending up the trial balloons for years. I was wondering when it was actually going to happen. There was never any doubt in my mind that it was going to happen somewhere eventually.
edit on 22-7-2013 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


I don't think so. If this were the US I may agree with you but IMO this is about not degrading women as progressive culture sees pornography as a male invention to empower themselves and dissempower women.

I understand what you are saying but the fact that this is being imposed "for everyones good" shows this is being focused into a traditional hardline progressive argument.

religious beliefs are not really imposed on members outside the group who has what ever particular faith.

progressive agendas are imposed on as broad an audience as possible....usually with the enforcement of actual law instead of a moral code being argued....



edit on 22-7-2013 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by alysha.angel
 





its degrading to the actors and its not much better then prostiution


So whats your screen name?


Or is this just a knee jerk statement solely based on speculation of something outside of your experiences?




Iv heard of young men and women being currupted and sexually twisted due to porn and its not really a need ,


Drugs, war, famine, poverty, porn, religion, law, truth, lies, money, power..... what else can one think of that corrupts the minds of our children and adults alike?

Why is England so different to many other European countries in terms of sexuality?

As pointed out look at Holland, education at a young age is key. for both sex and drugs.

Keeping children closed of for so long of the horrors of the world to only expose them to it when they are not prepared for it seems to be the western way of self destruction, all at the same time by exposing children from other parts of the world to horror no human should experience to destroy whats left.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join