Indian Supreme Court considering online porn ban

It seems to me that there are two threads of thought going here that are speaking somewhat across from each other. There would be two different statuses an action (x) could fall under.
1. I have a right to x. (Is the issue posting porn or looking at porn, I am no exactly clear on which is at issue. Is it one or the other or both. The possibility exists that I could have a right to post porn, but not look at it, or to look at it but not publish it.) If I have a right to it, then it does not matter what the consequences of it are. Take for instance the recent issue of forced single mother adoption in Australia. If I have a right to raise my child as a single mother, then it does not matter that forced adoption (HYPOTHETICALLY) makes happier children, smarter children, safer societies, etc. because I have a right to it.

(Bear in mind rights here mean natural rights derived in virtue of the fact that I am a person, not constitutional rights.)
2. I do no have a right to x. There are two possibilities for this.
a. Others have a right for me not to do x. In the case of forced adoption, the mother may not have a right to raise her child, but I have a right to live the safest possible society. Ergo, I have a right to not have single mothers raise children, so single mother child raising is banned.
b. Others do not have a right for me not to do x. This could be because it is just not the kind of thing that rights apply to or it could be because rights themselves don't really exist. In this case, we would look at the consequences. If banning single mother parenting creates more good than bad, it should be banned. If the converse is true, it should not be banned.

With respect to porn then, either we have a natural right to it or we do not. If it should be a natural right, then the consequences don't matter. If on the other hand, others have a natural right for it to be banned, then it must be banned. If we have no right for or against it, then we look at the consequences. It seems that some are saying, "look, I have a right to look at porn." Others then say "No you don't because look at all the bad stuff it causes." The problem is though, that the bad stuff doesn't matter if I have a right to it. The first step to show that porn should be banned (is that the question, or just that it is immoral? Again, those are two different issues.) would be to show that we have no right to it. Then we can talk about the consequences.

 

LOL
:rofl:

"very strong religious opinions on porn"

"secular issue about abuse against women and to a large extent against children"

Will somebody not on her ignore list please inform her that Islamic religion, tradition and secular law all regard women and children about as highly as cow crap.
Maybe someone should also inform the newly converted that Muslim men make up a large majority of the customers in the Thai brothels and are known for being into children and violent sex.

You see, it's crap like this that has everyone calling her a troll.

• Claims all technology is evil yet makes use of said technology for her own personal gain and frivolous pursuits.
• Claims to have read and researched these topics, yet when presented with FACTS, puts the respondent on "ignore" and pretends as if they or their comments don't exist.
• Calls for a ban on internet porn even though she has made use of it herself for financial gain (via evil technology no less).
• Feels that porn is degrading and abusive to women and children and has arrived at that epiphany by converting to a religion that practices, condones, has legalized, and encourages abuse and maltreatment of women and children.

THAT IS WHY IT IS VERY HARD TO TAKE HER SERIOUSLY!




p.s. this is not a personal attack, just a summation of facts.

 

It's mostly fact. But I'm not on her ignore list. If you guys were more respectful about disagreeing with her, you might not be on her ignore list.

I completely agree that Islam is inherently violent and sexist. And I will paraphrase what you said about Islam and the Muslim culture treating women like objects in both religious and secular law. And I will acknowledge that many young and old Muslims, converts and not, use the illegal sex trade as a way to have sex without 'soiling' women of their own culture. But to be fair:

Lots've people are hypocritical, you may be one of them, I definitely am. Our contradictions are what make us so interesting. But just because people think her views are horseshit or that she's gone off her rocker; doesn't mean it's nice to completely discount the possibility of sincerity and call her a troll.

Since she's serious about her religion, she shouldn't be blocking out opposing views, rather hearing them out and trying to learn how to best fit herself and her new religion in the modern society for the benefit of all parties. As well as allow people to caution her on certain contradictions and evils within the Muslim culture.
But can you really blame her for blocking people like GlenGlen? Or people who openly mock her religion whilst talking directly to her?

 

Blocking GlenGlen is just silly, it's GlenGlen for cripes sake!
The majority of people on her ignore list did begin respectfully (for HF), she just didn't want to hear what they have to say and only converses with those who agree with her or don't highlight her glaring contradictions

As far as her religion being openly mocked, sorry your right, Christianity is the only religion that is allowed to be openly mocked at HF, sorry, I keep forgetting.

 

I dont know if I am on an ignore list . The fact is that no one nation will be able to shut down porn . The only thing a country could might do is to cut off the net compleetly . Shut off all electricty , so people could not put up satellite antenas and watch it off satellite broadcasts , oh wight , you would haft to get rid of all t.v.s they could run them on battries with dvd players . They they would haft to sneak porn mags on jack asses . Maby that is what the o.p. of this thread wants to live in a pre 1900 kind of world .

 

LOL I'm not certain if you were trying to be a gallant knight or a little boy peeing on my roses.

How about for the sake of everything I just assume that you were being noble in your own way and just say thank you.
Your defense of my honor is greatly appreciated. :love:

If you want to make an innovation argument you certainly shouldn't be doing it from inside of something that stinks of being a monopoly.

These companies spend millions lobbying government for their own benefit and I'm sure they're quick to find ways to suppress little independants just to keep them from being a possible threat. I think it looks more like they're the biggest threat to someone just trying to get started is Google, Facebook, etc.

Wouldn't it have been better had some rules been put in place before letting everything go silly nilly? Perhaps if they had established a set of laws that insured healthy competition, unbiased and unmanipulated access to information and methods to prevent abuse of the Internet... We would today have certainly a different but more educational and more equal medium of communication instead of most of the rubbish we now have

As it stands now we have a handful of american corporations dominating the Internet. And I think that's something to be said right there. Ask yourself how is it good to have a handful of american corporations controling the vast majority of communications and the way the world accesses information. Also don't kid yourself. I know that sites like Google and people like Zukerberg want the public to believe that they did it all on their own. But you scratch a litte below the surface and you see they all got a leg up from government or some sort of american transnational corporation.

As for porn...
I must ask you if you truely want an Internet that's somehow indebted to the porn industry?

But how does anyone know it's your photo? I'm not saying anyone should be prevented from uploading just attach some measure of responsiblity with the upload. Make the site liable for the content and make the uploader identify themself before being allowed to upload.

And it's not always just a photo of themselves being uploaded.

For example if I plan on inviting some friends to my next birthday party... I know there will most certainly be photos taken at it. I would like to be asked for permission and so should my guests before anyone uploads a picture of us to facebook or some other site. And I promisse you that I'm not the only one that feels like that.

Another example I've also seen a lovely lady slip and fall in the tube and watched people snapping photos for their facebook page. I don't care how funny they thought her fall was, it blooming embarassing to her.

My friend is a measure of responsiblity and accountability so much to ask for?

You do know that Peter Acworth the CEO of kink.com was arrested for possession of cocaine and firing guns in the studios basement? Keep you're eyes peeled for this one. I promise you there's quite a story developing on this one.

As for Gail, she's well educated and her research is sound. But she's absolutely hated by the online porn communities. (Wikipedia where anyone can edit it.. I'm certain you're a bight man able to make the necessary calculations. I would hate to think if I had a wiki page what some of the people attacking me on this site might write about me)

Oh and it also doesn't help Gail much that she's completly empassioned by what she's doing and doesn't always come off as the professional academic that she is.

You're not

 

To my knowledge the US gov. cant block the extreamiest religious web sites . I dont know if it is a tec. thing , our 1st adment rites of free speach and religion , or both . If with all the power of the US gov. they can not block these sites what chanch does another country have with porn sites ? You have ever right to have moral or religious problems with porn , just dont force others to think , or feel the same way .

 

AHAHAHA.

Look at the tolerance inherent in islam. It's adherents are just mild-mannered, and mind their own business, so long as nobody screws with them. They NEVER try to dictate what others can do.

:leaving:

:2thumbsup:



(edit)Actually, I have had a change of heart. I think that, for the publich good, as OP says, we should ban things that spread bad ideas (as to who judges them bad, haaa.... yeah, that's not the point, ehh) like mysogeny. We should clearly ban the highly mysogenistic, violent, hateful, intolerant, fascistic, pedophillic (yes, the quran details the last prophet of god being a pedophile) islam.

Ban that shit, before it's bad examples effect the kids.

I have decided that I must adopt this stance, because when someone NOT in favor of banning something speaks out against it, they are told that they have closed minds, and are just not open to new ideas, but somehow when you believe that all new ideas must be wiped from the face of the earth, it's just your culture, and anyone who doesn't respect and honor and appease it is just a bigot. So, I now believe that islam must be wiped from the face of the earth, and don't any of you bigots dare tell me any of your closed minded ideas about how I might be wrong.

 

LOL, you have it the wrong way around.

Flip through a few chapters of 50 shades of grey, fire up the pink rabbit and watch a few BSDM porn vids, get on the internet froth herself up by obsessing about all the disgusting things men do to women i.e her, reload the batteries in the pink rabbit think about certain fantasies until she passes out and falls asleep. Try make her new found friend guilty if she is unable to stop her catting around, go see the Iman maybe pull a Basic Instinct move to watch him squirm pull oh typical man routine even though the Iman squirms cos shes too skanky.

No one would be on her ignore list, just that she knows its not going to work on Glen, he'll be yawn


On a more serious note, same kind of shit in India, protest marches full of older married women with big asses using it to try make their husbands feel guilty, when all of the victims are 5 to 23, mostly kids or teens. A whole bunch of crap about values and morality when they are just trying to stop their husbands beating off elsewhere so they are more reliant on them and can control them better. A week later same fat ass cows in the protest marches are giving death stares to some 17 yr old that didnt do anything other than get in visual range of their husband.

Porn? in some areas so impovershished they dont have the stuff to get access to te net, lucky if they have enough money to eat

A fucking 5 yr old in one case, and what are all these women in the protest marches doing about her or kids like her? Its not as direct or hanus as what the perps did but twisting it for your own agenda is still fucked. The younger ones dont trust the older ones, this is all a load of shit

 

My argument was about these website's beginnings, not their current states. You ignored it and went off on a tangent. Don't you recognize the problems that this system would cause with starting new sites and services? That your system would make it so that corporations and companies would have even more of a leg up on independents and small businesses?

How would an independent web designer be able to start a site uses user-content like YouTube or Myspace?
Who would want to upload to a site that has virtually no content, and requests that you send in proof of identity before uploading?

Most successful businesses do get help. It's called investing. What was the point of that argument?

It already is. Porn has helped the Internet's popularization like no other services outside of Google and Ebay. Every teen wanted one, and was able to convince their parents that they could use it for homework =P

There already is some measure of accountability. There is a legal system that thrives on frivolous civil suits such as people getting embarrassed. There was that woman who fell in a fountain while texting. When the video was uploaded, she sued the mall and the uploader for millions. Asking preventative control is far too much.

I don't give a shit if he was arrested for something completely unrelated. He has a great website that is very sex positive and humanist. Have you ever been arrested? Got yelled at by a teacher? Cause if you have, I'm not sure why I'm even discussing this with you.

Is there something wrong with the citations on the page? You're just nitpicking at this point.

 

On the internet and the porn industry . Inter net porn has hurt the porn industry . In the good old days one payed for porn at an adult store , or other place , today one can down load more than he/she could watch for free .A few of the dumb people still pay for on line sex . I have no idea where you get your facts from . I think some one is telling you what to think and how to feel . On wikipeda , tell me what is wrong with there text on porn and Islam . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam I did find this site , it discusses what a few people will do in the name of Islam ( warning site has grafic images ) http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ and this , from where the Quran states that a woman is worth less than a man http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/010-women-worth-less.htm

 

My friend I'm going to be busy for the next few days and I'm not sure if my next work placement will have a computer or Internet. So for the time being I'll capitulate the debate to you.

 

LOL, at least she didn't put you on her ignore list.....yet.:afro:

 

But I'm not entirely sure that she understands that "capitulate" like that means "admit you're right". I think she was trying to say "pause while I think of an answer".

:2thumbsup:

 

This is the part that gets me;

So she cares for the elderly and terminally ill in their homes, and while there makes use of their computer and internet connection to browse the web and post on HF.
So wouldn't that be considered taking advantage of the sick and dying?

Well I guess if your using someones evil technology that isn't yours it's ok.

 

If she is taking care of an elderly person and has there permission to use there computer and inter net , I have no problem with that . On the flip side , if while I was working on some ones a/c and asked them if I could use there computer and inter net to watch some porn , I would have problems with that my self . I may also take some time off from this thread , I may drink some beer and watch some porn . At home on my own comp. Porn does not make a guy a rapist any more that one joint gets some one hooked on weed .

 

Can you think about that for a minute or two. Take yourself out of the equation, possibly.

 

I'd say that porn is less likely to make someone a rapist than one joint is to make someone a pothead, because there's a correlation between smoking weed and being a pothead. There's no serious, unbiased and non-insane study that shows any serious correlation between watching porn and committing rape.

Also, the idea of banning porn - all porn - because rape happens is like banning video games - all video games - because violence happens, even the games with no violence in them. Not all porn involves rape. In fact, the vast majority of porn I've seen doesn't.

 

Honestly, I hope it doesn't. It seems like you could use a little break from this place. :daisy:

 

I think India's problem regarding rape is a wider problem regarding the treatment of gender roles, which stems from the caste system, also having ties into Hinduism, and moral behavior in society. Yes, you can argue that Hinduism stresses the concept of Karma, but it is a double-edged sword because it also has promoted a hands-off or laissez-faire approach to how others are treated.

For instance, if someone is seen as being treated badly, well they must've deserved their bad/abusive life because in a past life they were a bad person. So it's not my problem, they're learning something, if I interfere I'll pollute myself in my own journey spiritually. If they die they'll be reborn again.

Culturally, this has shaped India's views about gender roles and gave the foundation for the line between fiction and reality to be blurred to the point of non-existence for many males. Porn, in that environment has exacerbated this problem to the point of a national epidemic.

I would rather India, regulate and pass strict laws regulating their porn industry and trade, tax it and use those funds for community building and education among people starting in childhood to really care for their fellow citizens and look away from the doctrines of objectification of the female sex. You're less likely to convince the older ones where sexual urges have already kicked in biasing their hearts, but you can still try to get the message of compassion across.

There is also a huge problem of underage brothels in India as well, despite them being illegal on the books, but so far the written law has proven ineffective in changing the hearts and minds of society.

I am worried that this proposed "ban on porn" is a simple political symbolic gesture that is fooling sincere people of the Indian public who want to solve and address a genuine problem. After which, the local government there will adopt the view that "they tried, it failed, oh well". Wasted genuine political capital, if I am correct in how the events will unfold there.

The public needs smart advocacy, that balances the emotional will of the people, and the pragmatism of how a solution would address the problem logically. The "ban on porn" has the former, but it does not have the latter.

I would like Resistance isn't futile's reply to this post when she gets a chance to read this.