Peter Lairo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 01 Mar 2002:
> Peemm wrote: >> Jonas J›rgensen wrote: >> >> Pornography is nothing you get "turned on by". > > Why not? (Sounds like an autocratic statement to me.) Gee, someone telling us what we can and can't do with our free time, and what is and is not moral. Weren't a ton of wars fought in the past two hundred years because of reasons like this? > >> Porn is a substitute for real life. > > As are movies, music, paintings, concerts - should we shun these > too for that reason? I love all the things you just listed. I'm not a "pornomaniac" or anything, but I don't see anything wrong with watching some videos or looking at a magazine every now and then. > >> You might as well use heroine. > > Please explain why. This is an answer I'd like to see now. I'd like to see how porn == heroine >> And the producers of porn >> don't care about your pleasure; they want to get money - YOUR >> money! > > As does *any* capitalistic enterprize. Microsoft only cares about my money. Very few businesses anywhere care about me, they only want my money. That doesn't make them any better or worse than porn producers > >> This is the offensive part. You are dealing with a kind of robber >> here - not just a spammer. > > Let's sue Disneyworld too then, they are robbers by your reasoning. And I'll tell ya, I was so pissed the last time I went to Busch Gardens. Had to pay money to have fun. Oh wait, isn't that just like porn? You pay money and you get to do something you consider fun? > PS. Banning porn for the above reasons is just the fist step > towards blowing up budda statues in mountain sides. It's > irrational, self-righteous, high-ground mentality that threatens > those who "resist". If porn is banned, go right ahead and ban everything, put some elderly christian woman in a dictatorship position and kill me, because life is not worth living if someone is allowed to tell me what is and is not immoral -- AIM: FlyersR1 9 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ = m
