It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 24
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 06:26 AM
reply to post by ipsedixit

Parents don't like to be told that they're bad parents, and they consistently try to shift blame onto the society around them.

It is their sole job to raise a decent, law-abiding, moral child, and with the exception of mental disorders they are the ones to form their offspring and their decisions affect that child forever.

It's the music their kids listen to (ignoring the fact that they let them listen to it). It's the movies they watch (ignoring the fact that they don't stop them from watching them). It's the friends they hang out with (ignoring the fact that they don't prevent them from hanging out with them). It's the video games they play (ignoring the fact that they let them play those games).

There is ALWAYS someone for a lazy and ignorant parent to blame, other than themselves. It's everyone elses fault that their child is a thug, or lazy, or fat, or an idiot. It's never because they were more interested in their own lives or couldn't be bothered to educate themselves to improve their child and their education.

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 06:33 AM

Originally posted by JackofBlades

Originally posted by ThaEnigma

Originally posted by Swizzy
reply to post by mikegrouchy

Missing the point entirely.

Why should EVERY adult with internet access be subjected to this because of negligent parenting and lack of education on this subject?

1. There are too many negligent parents..
2. The ease and accessibility of online pornography and hyper-sexualized images can be quite hamful to young unsuspecting children's minds..
3. Isn't it easy to make a choice within your home if you wish to be exposed to uncensored material.. (I for one would be ok with that)..
4. It's easy to turn this discussion into a "nanny-state" argument, but in this case, with the proliferation of pornography to unseen levels, it has become a worthwhile topic to debate with regards to protecting our society and its values...

You've missed the point being made there, entirely.
The issue is that me and millions of other internet users shouldn't have to pay the price because parents aren't making any effort whatsoever to do something as simple as learn how to put blocks or filters in place. ISP's should shoulder the responsibility of ensuring parents are informed enough to place a block on their network, and if they're not they shouldn't have the internet. Like any piece of technology or information, it should be regulated, and in a house with children the burden must be placed on the adults to make sure they're proficient enough to monitor their kids, and also to limit what they can and cannot access.
As an analogy, I have no driving license. If I go to a car dealership, and "opted-in" to a contract to drive safely, would the dealer sell me a car? No, he'd tell me I'd need a license.
Similarly, if a parent goes to an ISP and says "One internet, please," the ISP should ask them if they know how to implement parental filters, prevent their children from using a proxy to bypass those filters, how to use monitoring software. If the parent looks at them like this
they can't have any internet until they can do these things.
I mean, it's not particularly hard to learn how to do them. Or even really time consuming. It's just pure lack of knowledge from parents who are only (in the last decade or so) really making use of computers which the children of the last decade have grown up with. Unfortunately, the parents must shoulder all of the blame here, as it's their job to keep on top of things like this. I, and those like me, have absolutely nothing to do with the porn in their homes, and don't ant anything to do with it. I don't want to opt-in or out, I don't want to be grouped with them, and I don't want the government SETTING A PRECEDENT for the monitoring and snooping of our internet usage. Seriously, the things I find myself looking at at 4am freak me out. I don't want a stranger knowing and assuming I'm psychotic.

Anyway, watching Cameron's various interviews, it seems the main focus of this move was to stop the spread of child pornography. Which this won't really impact. They'll just stop using something as traceable as the internet, and start moving their material by hand.

The issue isn't that porn exists and kids can access it.
Please. Porn's been around as long as sex has been around, and kids have always had access to it. Whether that was sneaking away to read a pinched magazine in the 30's, or searching for something on Google.

In short, it's not my fault parents aren't 1337. LRN2 INTERNET

Trust me Jack, I agree with every point you made, unfortunately this time around I'm siding with the Govt.. True, it's no problem to regulate from within the home environment, but then why do so many parents not exercise their best judgement when it comes to protecting their children..? I believe it's because they're either lazy, computer-illiterate, negligent or a toxic combination of the three...

I'm curious about the precedent this sets as you are also, but like I said before, with regards to this issue I believe in hardcore porn censorship by default followed by the option to uncensor..


Mod note: 15b.) Profanity: You will not use profanity in our forums on the Websites, and will neither Post with language or content that is obscene, sexually oriented, or sexually suggestive nor link to sites that contain such content. You will also not use common alternative spellings or net-speak alternative for profane words.

edit on 23/7/13 by argentus because: Removed sexually oriented material

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 06:43 AM
I say let them do this opt in, and when they do I'll ring them every night and say turn it on for me please. 10 minutes later I'll ring back to say I've changed my mind.

I urge everyone to do this. When the isp's realise they are going to need about an extra 10,000 late night call centre workers they may swiftly change their minds.

On the plus side think of all those people with the "accent" in a far away place who need jobs.

I for one will happily knock one off with a glowing feeling inside knowing I've helped feed a family in India and thoroughly enjoyed myself doing it

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 07:57 AM
completely agree with other posters here with the hint at our government trying to get their foot into the "internets" in order to impose control and restrictions on our internet freedoms and the stream of information which we receive from it !

first its attacking porn which has long been a fight the government have attempting to win !
next it will be the sites as I mentioned which give vast amounts of scientific information on the effects of "illegal drugs" which could potentially save lives and allow people to make the right decisions.

Then it will be the bloggers and political net activists who are deemed immoral or too shocking for the youth of tomorrow ! then it will be the music which gives them energy to rebel against the government.

first its porn , then its goose stepping to the door of number 10 !

what will it be though , the bargaining chip for MP's and the ISP's those who do block by default are given some kind of special tax exemption for their corporation ?

must be some sweet deal to further unite corporation and the state !

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:01 AM

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:10 AM
It's long overdue and other countries need to adopt the same guidelines for pornography. It ruins lives, little kids and big kids alike!

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:12 AM
It is just another trivial issue to create in order to cause havoc among the sheep so the status quo can be maintained.

Fairly obvious that we've been in the cave since time immemorial.


What is more important, passing laws about sexuality.

Or fixing the basic social issues facing us, issues like debt, uneducated youth, and starvation.

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:12 AM
So I guess it's back to paper magazines and porno reel tapes, I guess...
Download while you still can! !!!!!

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:22 AM
Time to open an "adult" only Blockbusters?

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:22 AM
Duplicate post
edit on 23-7-2013 by frozenP because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:36 AM
reply to post by Biigs

How could I forget Game of thrones!!!!


posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:46 AM
I can't believe that here on a conspiracy site there are people who believe this is a good thing.

It is being implemented under the guise of "dealing with child porn" but also to "protect children from seeing porn".

Well, which is it?

It is patently obvious that children are being used as the trigger to get people to accept it, since after all, if you disagree then by default you MUST be a paedophile.

This is the simplistic approach that is being presented to the populus, it is akin to the "I can't say anything about immigration or people will think I'm a racist nazi," and "I can't say anything about my views on homosexual marriage or people will think I'm a bigot and homophobic."

It's using blunt emotional tools to force a law into existence that will achieve NOTHING in terms of cutting out child porn.

As we all know child porn is on the deep web, that can't be accessed via Google, since accessing the deep web via Tor is anonymous, untraceable, and unblockable.

This is a move to initiate the regulation of the web, which may include the regulation in future of damaging articles and news regarding our inglorious leaders, but will certainly lead to taxation, since regulation and taxation go hand in hand.

By accepting this utter tripe we are giving the government the green light to charge us for internet access and emails, etc at best, and to turn us into China mk2 at worst.

Just look at what happened when the publically owned post office saw how well eBay was doing - they decided they could make a mint by upping international postage to ridiculous proportions, making selling goods on eBay completely unprofitable because the added postage costs meant no one wanted to buy from abroad.

They are about to kill yet another goose that is laying golden eggs because they think that they should be entitled to any and all profit that other people might make from their industry and intelligence, and in a time of economic crisis it's shameful.

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:49 AM
reply to post by Shiloh7

The concern I brought up is about my three year old grand daughter who can access mobile phones and once on the seat also my computer. I want her to be curious and travel the internet but I do want her protected from porn - by which I don't mean nudity, I mean hardcore, porn and snuff etc.

So what is so difficult in what is being suggested.

Parents take responsibility if they want these devices by applying the correct filters to block what they dont want their children to see.

This type of blocking is available on digital televisions to block certain shows or certain channels, Many have pointed out this is available for responsible parents who want to protect their children.

There is no logic other than wool being pulled over your eyes for supporting this proposal as it is.
If it was opt in as many are suggesting it should be then at least it doesn't impose on peoples freedom by having to ask the government for internet porn.

But we protect those we love even though at times our action have very logic towards society as a whole when our child is in danger.

I just hate that politicians are using "the children, oh think of the children" approach for an agenda that none of us really know and can only speculate on. If it was for the children's protection these types of filters would of been applied by ISPs and regulated by Federal governments 15 years ago or longer.

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:03 AM

Originally posted by Xterrain

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

Pornography negatively impacts any society. It's unnatural to see other women without their consent to you personally. I agree with this and I hope it becomes a global decision. We don't need it. It does no good. Too many people take advantage of immature, adolescent girls, and those girls get into drugs and that path is a short one and anyone who's using the images is contributing to their habits, way of life, and in some cases, their eventual death.

Flame on internet porn geeks...
edit on 23-7-2013 by Xterrain because: (no reason given)

on ignorance that is chocking society.

People make choices and people like yourself seem to think its OK for people not to be responsible for the choices they themselves made, why?

Do you like to pass blame on anything external you can find when something goes wrong?

It has been as it will be a global decision, and it seems that only a small section of that globe are trying to impose this on its people, the people of the world have decided they want porn if you take a look around.

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:07 AM
reply to post by Aisling

Porn addiction is very real and damaging. I want it GONE.

The addiction or the porn?

Because with porn gone addiction attaches to something else.

I'm ALL for blocking it. It is degrading to women,

Posting "its degrading to women" could be viewed by a woman to be degrading by insinuating your speaking for women as a whole.

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:18 AM

Originally posted by Aisling

Originally posted 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

iv spoken to young men about this subject and to find out that what their expecting is not what their going to get in the bedroom because a lot of women have different views on whats right and wrong in the bedroom .. id like to pat the guy on the back for this ..

A lot of people who are pro porn, have no idea what it's like to deal with porn addiction. They have NO idea the damage and despair it can cause for the addicted person and their families. It's unreal.

A lot of people who are pro porn know that addiction that plagues a person is a lot more to addiction than the substance or subject they are addicted to.

What good what a ban as such do for these addicts, some would move on a be cured so to speak, some will move to other addiction, others will take their addiction underground and society will have another criminal entity pop up, instead of drug dealers at the street corner it will be porn dealers dealing USD drives and DVDs.

Placing bans on things such as this where people say that this has touched them personally can only open a can of worms because its sort of sweeping the real issue under the rug by not dealing the root causes if it can be found.

Banning something stinks of a hidden agenda to cause revolution, whether thinking or acting.

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:23 AM
(First, I have to apologize to the person I quoted here. Somehow I lost the person's user name and was unable to find their post after I'd made my post)


THIS is what Really peeves me about the whole damn Porn Rape culture. Got news for ya buddy, there is a LOT of VIOLENT RAPE in PORN

Is that so? You got credible evidence with multiple witnesses and convictions? Or are you just responding emotionally to what you believe you're seeing on a TV/computer screen?

There is a LOT of Trafficking and Raped into Porn AND Prostitution, Fact

1. Porn IS prostitution. It's just filmed. I contend there is nothing wrong with prostitution so long as it is consensual. Unless you think prostitution is automatically bad, I don't see what this has to do with anything. Prostitution should be legal.

2. "Trafficking"? Not really sure what this term means? Are you implying they have sexual prisoners in the middle of the UK where they are kept in cages or something and aren't allowed to leave?

There is a Lot of WAR PORN made from horrible rape camps

Again, I think the burden of proof would certainly be on you. It seems to me that a government that is so eager to do something about the "corrosive influence" of porn would certainly be quick to prove that all of these things are the norm in the porn industry (rather than some unfortunate but relatively uncommon cherry picked examples).

You make the accusation, you present the proof. And I mean proof. Not some stupid documentary made by some fool who is obviously anti-porn and doing his/her best to appear to be objective.

I'm not a prude nor am I opposed to Erotica, However I am LOUDLY opposed to the Billion dollar Industry that Thrives on DESTROYING REAL HUMAN BEINGS.

1. I don't think anyone (other than yourself) accused these people of not being human beings. (Insisting that these people do not have the right to choose to do things you wouldn't do yourself is denying them a significant part of their humanity)

2. I seriously doubt the actual objective of the vast majority of the porn business is to destroy anyone. They simply want to make money. Maybe the consequences sometimes indirectly contribute to serious problems for the people involved but I do not believe the vast majority of pornographers have any intentions of "destroying" anyone. You are cherry picking examples of people on the extreme fringes and painting the entire industry the same as them.

Long time Anti porn sex slavery advocate who has Met and Talked to Numerous females DESTROYED by this sick industry. It is an Abusive, Enxploitative, Soul destroying Industry that Destroys millions.

1. So first you admit that you're biased


2. You point out that you've talked to people who obviously have axes to grind with the industry. Any industry is going to produce it's fair share of disgruntled EX employees, wouldn't you say?

Do you honestly think there aren't people who are trying to get even because of some petty dispute they had with someone in the industry over some technicality? This happens in every single industry. What is the easiest way to get even with someone who makes porn for a living? Duh! Accuse them of some kind of unethical behavior. So don't you think any kind of accusation that comes from someone like this should be taken with a few grains of salt? Well, it probably would be if you weren't so eager to find excuses for your prejudice.

On another note, Someone said that there is no Sex Crime in Amsterdam, I beg to differ,

My guess is there is crime everywhere.

Countless studies have shown sex crime has been on the decline just about everywhere since the rise of the internet. You know why? Because people who are sitting around staring at a computer screen are a whole lot less likely to be out running around looking for trouble.

FINALLY - You need to realize that these people are using you. They know these issues (porn, sex, morality and so forth) inspire passion in the morality zealots. Porn is an easy doorway into the censorship realm. If you are a government and you want to ease into censorship, you obviously start with the path of least resistance. And believe it or not, porn is probably the path of least resistance because the people who are most likely to care about it are probably the people who are least likely to march down the street with "Save the porn!" signs.

This is precisely what they need to get their foot in the door on censorship. So congratulations for helping them out. I appreciate it. I'm sure future generations will appreciate it when they have little to no freedom left.
edit on 23-7-2013 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:36 AM
As a woman, I can say that pornography is very degrading for women. As someone noted, it is "filmed prostitution". It does not honor women and it does not treat women as sacred. I remember being a 12 year old little girl, finding my father's porn magazines in the garage while looking for an air pump to fix my bike tire. I remember seeing my dad in a whole different light after this, and I can tell you I lost a lot of respect for him. I felt "icked out" by him. I do believe that this was the beginning of losing my trust in my dad. I often wondered, why did he have to look at it, when my mom was there. Why did he find that interesting. It grossed me out.

When I turned 14, I told my mom about those magazines in the garage and she said "not to touch them". And I said, "Mom, doesn't it bother you???" and she got tears in her eyes and said that it did, but that it was "your dad's business".

When I turned 18, and in the middle of an argument with my dad, I told him about how offensive it was to me to grow up with these things hidden in our garage. At first he was angry that I brought it up, but then he felt ashamed and agreed that it was wrong. He apologized and got rid of them.

I don't know if he checks out porn online, but I'm sure he does. It bothers me you know, cause that's supposed to be my dad, who should respect women.

Take my experiences and feelings for what you will, but that's how I feel. My boyfriend knows full well how I feel about porn, and he does not use our computer for it nor does he keep magazines around. If he has them, they are not in here and that's OK. I just don't want that crap under my roof. He respects that.

Interesting how this thread pops up because my boyfriend was telling me the other day how he often looked at it when he was young and that when we had kids there was no way it would be in the house or on our computer. He said he wants to be an example for our kids.

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:41 AM
reply to post by Power_Semi

It takes a "big picture" mentality to keep up with our ever manipuliating powers that be. They are sneaky bastards, pulling their shanigans at every turn.

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:42 AM
If anything, this thread has shown me people who have little respect for women and how we feel. They will say whatever they can to make excuses for their pornography. Most women hate it and find it disgusting. I've watched many documentaries about women who worked as sex workers and in porn and they hated it as well. men have a fantasy that the women in these videos or photos are enjoying what they do, but that's not true.

Oh and do count me as another person who would be happy for a porn ban. I'd jump for joy actually. In fact, that is one movement I'd be thrilled to support.

top topics

<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in