Slashdot Mirror
Senator Carper Calls for Tax on Online Porn
Better-living-thru-taxes writes "Senator Tom Carper (D-Del) is calling for a 25% tax on all internet pornograpy. The money is to help police fight online child pornographers. 'Carper says the bill will keep kids away from X-rated material.'"
Aren't there constitutional issues here? It seems odd to have a situation where the IRS decides what is and what isn't pornography.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
generic porno relate to child-abuse anymore than indy-500 to bank robbery escape with a car?
And just who gets to decide what constitutes Pornography?
Are we going to tax web pages which talk about breast cancer, just because they contain the word breast?
And how would such taxes be collected, Especially if the server resides outside the US?
Yet the senator who proposed the bill is a Democrat, who Christian groups rated as voting 16% pro-family...
Not sex....
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
There are gazillions of loopholes, that will needed to be plugged before they can see money flowing in.
hilarious
Why would a child seeing two consenting adults having sex "corrupt" them.
As someone who was once addicted to porn, I can tell you that it can seriously screw up your notions about the realities of sex. Easy access to pornography on the internet during my single years definitely caused me some problems once I got into a real relationship. It's hard to settle down with one woman when you've been going through 20 different girls every night, even when that one woman has the advantage of being real and not just an image. I'm still trying to deal with the effects that such easy access to pornography has dealt to my psyche.
Granted, that's my problem and my responsibility, and no one else's, and I'm not advocating the nanny-state. But don't be so quick to think that porn never hurt anybody.
Sex feels good. Sex is free. Sex can relieve stress, let you express love and is one of the most intimate acts in the world.
It is because of this that profiteers hate it. Why? Because instead of buying products, people will have sex. This is bad for the economy.
Getting into Freudian philosophy and science, has it ever occured to you that perhaps large or covetted things like computers, cars, possessions like iPods or other things are just temporary mental replacements for the lack of sex drive or the lack of sex at all? Maybe that intimacy we experience with our toys is what replaces the intimacy between two people?
The control of sex is the control of basic human emotion and instinct. If you control sex or the sex drive, the base of all instinct in mammals, you control the person is belongs to. Don't have sex! Buy these indulgences and be saved from Satan! Having sex is a sin and will breed disease! Come to church more and fork over your money!
Not all churches are like that, or even the ones who used to do that stuff actively *coughcatholiccough*. But the fact remains, the meaning of life for a human being, at the base, is to reproduce, be happy, and keep yourself occupied.
Supression of instinct, especially sex, breeds a consumer - someone looking for something to fill the void. In a society where you can turn on the TV and see a child with all of his limbs amputated or a "precision" American bomber carpet bombing populated areas, I find it disgusting that this society bars SEX, SEX of all things, from television, but allows people to go on TV, preach about beating up prostitutes and being a "playa" or how various thousands of people are dying.
Neither should be barred. But the one you'd think wouldn't be, is.
Many distributors, paysite owners, and content promoters have gone offshore. In adult web, offshoring makes sense; IBCs and holding companies make sense. Frankly, if there is anything preventing most Americans in the adult web industry from doing so, it's ignorance and Americentrism.
Perhaps it's because 3 black dudes doing an asian chick at the same time and dropping their loads in her eye might give the wrong impression of what it's all about. I can't speak for you, but I don't partake in interracial gangbangs, facials, or S&M. If you consider that "normal" maybe you should see a therapist.
I'd rather my 14-year-old granson look to those fine gentleman as role models, as opposed to the politicians running countries such as Britain and America. You know, the politicians who have instigated wars that have lead to the maiming and brutal murders of hundreds of thousands of civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq.
At least the Asian woman in your example was partaking in the act with consent; unlike the thousands upon thousands of children who have had their limbs blown off without their consent, in the wars directly started by those politicians who you seem to think are extremely moral.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
I'm curious. I have never had a chance to speak to someone who was addicted to porn and I'd really like to ask you one thing if you don't mind.
Do you view porn as being addictive, or do you view yourself as having an addictive personality?
I have to admit, I'm a little defensive and biased since I run adult sites for a living. I've had easy access to porn for over 10 years online and I look at porn every day as part of my business.. and I've never had any problems with addiction, or my relationships etc.
I have suffered a serious drug addiction to speed in my past, and so I understand how powerful and devastating addiction can be. It caused me to steal from people I love, it kept me up all night on binges, it affected my work life and my social life etc. I had to go through rehab and group therapy etc. Yet I've never experienced any of the warning signs that might lead me to believe that I could be addicted to porn. I've never thought about porn (at least excessively) while away from it. I've never neglected any responsibilities so I could look at porn (never left work, never missed a bill so I could pay for porn etc.) I've never once gotten bored of my wife or turned her down for sex so that I could go jack off to 20 different girls instead etc.
I'm not trying to downplay your addiction. I am fully aware that there are people who suffer through addictions to porn. And, as someone who suffered drug addiction, I understand the power of addiction and I understand how serious it can be on ones life.
I'm just wondering, do you think porn is addictive ? Or are people who get addicted to porn the type of people who would also easily get addicted to gambling, video games, hookers etc. ?
Most atheists are some of the most generally "nice" people around (except when you ask them about religion!). The reason, I think, because we prescribe to THIS life, not something beyond. We realize that we are all we have!
I like my women how I like my sugar.. granulated.
I'm with you, I'm agnostic and I don't expect an afterlife. If some day I find myself in heaven or hell, I guess I'll have a red face. Oh well. But besides that, I'm a good person. I do right even though I don't believe that it's going to earn me eternal life. I'm just compelled to; it's in my character.
I think that our notion of right and wrong are buried deep in our genes. Cooperation is what makes us more survivable than many other animals, and somewhere in that we've had to learn to get along. I'm suggesting that sociability, and the order from chaos that follows is what made us better and stronger than the rest.
I'm also suggesting that morality is completely arbitrary, but a certain set of conditions led humanity to our current point. If for some reason our ancestors were made stronger and more survivable by eating their young, or doing any of the myriad of things we consider to be amoral, that's what we'd be doing today.
I think that most of us have in our genetics the desire to do what's right, and that we're all basically good deep down inside. If you believe that God made you that way, that's cool too. Our conclusions are basically the same. Of course, there's some among us that are anti-social - raping, stealing, and otherwise being uncooperative. I think that somewhere down the line their ancestors were made survivable by deviating from the pack. They were stronger, they stole food, killed their own and spread their genes contrary to the established protocols--and here they are today following the lessons of their predecessors--being assholes.
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
Having an "explanation" for the sex drive and uncontrollable urges doesn't make it any easier to live with said urges, especially when we also have a conscience and a sense of morality fused into our own beings.
Should a man be happy that his body is telling him to screw any healthy female he comes across?
I'm fortunate enough to be tapped into my emotions and conscience more than I'm tapped into my biological urges. I don't like to cause other people psychological pain nor cause myself psychological pain. All I've ever gotten from promiscuity was pangs of guilt.
You can take your evolutionary biological explanation and smoke it, cause when it comes to living with emotions and having a conscience, the explanation doesn't tell you how to live your life.
I like my women how I like my sugar.. granulated.
Yo, Senator!
How about a 25% tax increase on all the corporations who register in tiny dipshit Delaware in order to avoid paying taxes in their home areas?
Taxes that are supposed to go to pay for children's services like health care, security, and education?
Oh? No longer interested? Fuck you, shitheel politician whore!!!
Come to think of it, instituting an import duty on foreign porn would probably be much more effective at combating child pornography, because most of it (at least the professionally produced stuff) is foreign. I might even e-mail the senator with the idea...
argumentum ad fallacium: Fallacy of defining a fallacy which allows one to dismiss the argument in question.
I believe St. Augustine is credited with being the first self loathing, sex-is-dirty type christian.
Unfortunately, he set the tone for all those that followed.
You oversimplify. You are presuming that the evolutionary pressure that shaped us and allowed us to live what is now considered a normal life. The reality is that over the period that evolution has shaped us life has on average been brutal and comparitively very short. This would strongly favour spreading your seed around. Stability is important but the degree of stability is relative and where lifespan is short it probably becomes less important. However in some circumstances stability would be highly favourable. The upshot of this is that what you would expect to see is a variety of different behaviours to fulfill different niches. Sure enough you will find that the degree of testosterone expression in both males and females variers hugely creating people who are comparitivly promiscuios and people who are aren't. Sadly many people think that everybody else is the same as them and should be able to see thing in the same way and behave in the same way as they do. They just totally miss the point that a large proportion of the population just have a different dominant forces in their brain chemisrty and that these difference are there for evolutionary reasons.
If I had 14/15/16-year old daughters, they couldn't have credit card access unless I gave it to them. Therefore, they couldn't pay for porn (or much else) on the Internet. So, the argument is really quite irrelevant.
That said, you can either have an open communication and actually reinforce your kids with your values, take reasonable steps to block offensive material, or both. The onus of upholding your values among your wards should be up to you.
Information wants to be free.
Entertainment wants to be paid.
You just want to be cheap.
There's actually little evidence to support that position. All evidence seems to suggest that people who have 'poorer' social outcomes are more likely to have children. Look at the number of children those living in poverty in this country have, versus the number of children the average phd has.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
The Democrats in your country are further right-wing than the Conservative Party in my country (Canada). Your whole idea of left wing vs. right wing is quite, quite skewed. When the rest of the world looks at you, we see a very right wing country - with only two right wing parties.
And I don't know how you can say that Socialism doesn't work...Have you ever taken a look at Socialist countries? Canada, for one, Sweden and the other Scandinavian countries for other examples. Democratic Socialism works, and has always worked. The problem with alot of Americans, I find, is that they automatically associate Socialism or Communism with the Soviet Union or China. You have to realize that neither of these countries were Communist, except in name.
The Soviet Union's idealogy was a brand of Authoritarianism with Socialist leanings (everything was State owned), which could be called Stalinism. One of the reason's why it failed so badly was that it was opposed to change, and, when it finally realized that it needed to change it was too late for it to filter down from the beaurcracy to the people.
I don't exactly know how you could call China Communist - even during the height of the Cold War, they would not associate with Soviet Brand "Communism" (Sino-Soviet Split, everyone). During the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward the country was in chaos - no, not Communism, the country was literally falling apart. There was no central authority, only little regional warlord type people all fighting one another. I suppose you could all it a state of Civil War (which it was, I guess. Mao was trying to purge his opponents from the leadership position by mobilizing the students in urban centres).
Anyway, regardless of the chaos that happened during the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward, one must merely look at the reforms of Deng Xiaoping. His economic reforms created "special economic zones", allowing foreign companies to invest in China and for factories to be built that weren't state owned. It also allowed for private ownership of business and other things such as property by private Citizens of China, even non-members of the Communist Party.
To go even further, look at the doctrine of One Country Two Governments - the official party and state line regarding the future of Hong Kong. For 50 years, there will be no change in the running of Hong Kong - the Chinese weren't stupid, Hong Kong has more money flowing through it everyday than most countries in Asia get in a month. Don't you think such a practise (allowing a special autonomous region of capitalism) would be counter-inuitive to Communism? Whether it be the "Communism" of Stalin, Maoism or just good ol' Marxism, spreading the Revolution and mobilizing the Proletariat is the most important thing.
Now, I digress from that tangent. However...
Unless you Americans want a neo-conservative government, headed by imperialists and neo-liberal economists, you must vote for someone other than the Republician party. The current dominant faction within the Republician party are the neo-cons (Paul Wolfowitz, anyone?) - since the 80's they have been trying to bring about their ultimate goal, the Pax Americana. The American Peace. Through funding secret wars in third world countries, and securing vital assets in various parts of the world, they are setting the board for the final showdown on the Eurasian Chessboard.
What is the Eurasian Chessboard, you ask? Well, like any good geopolitical scientist or aficionado knows, it's the continent of Eurasia, and, more specificially the most important part of that continent - the central Asian republics.
Now, Iraq was merely the first step. It allows for a foothold in the Middle East, in a strategic position next to Iran (I'm betting the second target) and basically sandwiches a whole bunch of enemies of Israel (a very important dwarf-super power).
I could go on and on about the whole apparent plan, but I'm not going to. I'm going to tell you where I got all o
Check out this definition:
"Any specific system of belief about deity, often involving rituals, a code of ethics, and a philosophy of life." Thus we would include Agnosticism, Atheism, conservative Christianity, Humanism, Islam, Judaism, liberal Christianity, Native American Spirituality, Wicca and other Neopagan traditions as religions.
Just because our belief is based on *gasp* logic, doesn't exclude it from being a belief.
Really, I'm not trying to be clever with my signature.