It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by uncommitted
Originally posted by Timely
reply to post by uncommitted
Just keep it out of kiddies faces. Simple.
And if you agree or not with the proposed method of execution, that is part of the intention of this - not sure I really understand your point.
Listen as I said, I don't have a strong opinion one way or another, but all some people are going off on here is that this represents some loss of liberty which I fail to see is the case unless of course the internet contract in your house is managed by your other half who would opt out of being able to view porn (or opt in to not be able to, whatever) and you would rather have the option.
Originally posted by Unity_99
I personally believe that porn is not only demeaning and dehumanizing to women and humanity, but that it is a huge crime against humanity, and makes victims world wide. I want it illegal in video and in magazine form. All those smutty magazines burnt in a huge heap. I want every strip joint in the world shut down. As well.
And it would be about time.edit on 22-7-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)
'The Daily Mail has campaigned hard to make internet search engine filters “default on”. Today they can declare that campaign a success' Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Originally posted by shells4u
This should have been done from the start. If folks want free porn then let them have sex the old fashioned way...with their wives/girlfriends/husbands/boyfriends...online porn only leads to a computer virus anyways...
Do Not Force ISP Filtering of Pornography and Other Content
Responsible department: Department for Culture, Media and Sport
The government is currently trying to push a bill forcing ISPs to provide opt-out pornography filtering, however this is an issue that fails to address any real problems.
Bad parenting is the real problem, and bad parents will simply allow the filter to be enabled and believe it protects their children, even though the filters are easily (even trivially) circumvented. Parents need to supervise and educate their children about internet use, not rely on filters of dubious effectiveness.
It also sets a poor precedent that objectionable content can be blocked at the ISP level in the name of protecting children, who are in fact being harmed more by poor parenting. Aside from content of a clearly illegal nature the government should not be forcing the presence of filters at all, but instead pushing to improve the involvement of parents in a child's life, and to promote education over flimsy, disruptive, and money-wasting "solutions".
Originally posted by alysha.angel
As a parent of teenage girls , i strongly approve of this and believe its needed ..
Iv heard of young men and women being currupted and sexually twisted due to porn and its not really a need ,
i hope someday the rest of the world does the same thing . its degrading to the actors and its not much better then prostiution
(visit the link for the full news article)