Even if you include polygamy, *a marriage* is still a contract between one man and one woman. He may be married to more than one woman. A “family” may be one man + multiple wives, but a “marriage” is one of each.
Even if you throw out the reproductive purpose, it’s still always between one man and one woman.
I fail to see what the big fucking deal is, though. What’s wrong with just saying that marriage is a religious status, not a legal status? What’s wrong with making everyone get the same thing and calling it a civil union instead? What’s wrong with letting people continue to get married by their churches, since the government won’t be involved and gay-friendly churches can marry their couples and the churches who believe homosexuality is sin can claim that those marriages aren’t valid, and that’s perfectly okay because it’s a religious document with no force of law?
Well yes, but I suppose there could have been a slim chance I was wrong.
You obviously care, so I feel relatively safe in assuming you voted. That leaves McCain, 45.7%, but I feel pretty safe in ruling him out as well (given your previous statement). That leaves 54.3% of the popular vote, of which Obama got 52.9%, leaving 1.4% third-party votes.
So, if you do all the math, there was a 2.65% chance I was wrong if I assumed you supported Obama.
Oh, there's a grey area with older teens or younger-looking adults - Personally, I think the age of consent (for sex and for video/pictures) should be lowered to 14/16 or so (you know - the historical "move out and start your own life" age), but (for example) a video or picture of an adult having sex with an 8 year old is evidence of a rape, period, end of story. It cannot be tolerated, it will not be tolerated - in production, absolutely.
Agreed.
Basically, CP is an abomination that should be hunted down and destroyed with every legal and just method - with one caveat.
Agreed, with one caveat: hunt down the people who are making it. Unless the people who consume it can somehow help you find the people who are making it, going after them is just about as effective as it has been in the farce known as the war on drugs.
Someone real has to get hurt. Sketches of people don't hurt other people.
Agreed. Put the blame on the people who deserve it, though: the producers.
You can’t sell, consume, promote, or otherwise utilize a movie without inherently promoting its production. That’s why the MPAA encourages piracy of movies.~
-CP is produced. Someone purchases it and shares it online via file sharing. Other people download it from them, making the person that produced it happier as others find out to come to "jasonXXX8yrold" for more files. All people that downloaded it are supporting the production, because they are encouraging the distribution of the file.
You obviously do not know how this sort of thing works. The people who produce it do not want it widely distributed... as soon as it’s found by law enforcement, it’s a piece of potential evidence to find them and catch them. Hell, anonymous people on the internet tracked down a woman who stomped on a kitten with spike heels... do not underestimate the power of benign things.
-CP is produced. Someone purchases it, thereby supporting the person they got it from directly.
Those sort of things are carefully designed trades. They don’t deal with people they don’t trust, and they don’t trust people unless those people also abuse kids. There’s too much risk of being caught in a sting... and the imprudent ones who do stupid stuff like you described do get caught... which is why you think that they’re all like that, I suppose. It’s only the really clever ones who get away with it... and you don’t even know most of them exist.
-CP is produced. The producer places it online in a cloud-style system, and then monitors to see how many times it's been downloaded. Nobody pays for it, ever. But the producer gets a "good feeling" from being popular, so he continues to produce it.
They do not do it for the notoriety. That is absurd. They do it because they like abusing kids. The ones who do film it do so mostly just to share amongst themselves. If anything, when their materials do leak it just means they should be even more careful in the future because they don’t want law enforcement getting wind of them.
I think we can come to a reasonable middle ground here:
Clitoridectomy should be legal as long as the mother wants to have the fetal clit excised from the rest of the fetus while the fetal head is still inside the woman’s birth canal. It’s her body, after all.
And yes, I deliberately found a story on Fox News just to irritate you. At least Fox News is openly biased, unlike the source that you cited which hides its bias by pretending it’s just looking for truth.
Why stop at mammalian DNA? I’m sure there’s somebody out there with a turtle, snake, hamster, fish, iguana, rabbit, bird, or god-knows-what-else who’s willing to take a DNA sample and submit it in place of his own...
If you want to define marriage in that way, you pretty much have to accept that it is by definition a union between a man and a woman for the purposes of reproduction.
Which, as I’m sure you’re well aware, is considered a religious opinion, which is why I say it should be moved to the realm of religion, not law.
Maybe it was redundant because he cleverly bolded the word “porn” to make it stand out and then pointed out the rather obvious fact that it was unlike the others?
And maybe something that’s otherwise somewhat redundant can be funny if you put it to a witty rhyme?
The freedom of the person who’s looking at a picture and thinking something naughty.
The people who actually produced the stuff... the adults who abused kids to make porn... well, you apparently didn’t read his comment very well, because he already said you should go after them.
If CP was not so regulated and forbidden, there would be a lot less children harmed in the making of it. Since it is though, it has created a large economy dedicated to the production of it.
Because the “news snippet” is actually just the first 2 paragraphs of the article, copied verbatim, and the nature of the porn wasn’t mentioned until the 3rd paragraph:
The Federal Trade Commission today got a judge to effectively kill off the Internet Service Provider 3FN who the agency said specialized in spam, porn, botnets, phishing and all manner of malicious Web content.
The ISP's computer servers and other assets have been seized and will be sold by a court and the operation has been ordered give back $1.08 million to the FTC.
According to the FTC in June 2009, it charged that 3FN, which does business as Triple Fiber Network, APS Telecom, APX Telecom, APS Communications, APS Communication and Pricewert LLC, actively recruited and colluded with criminals to distribute harmful electronic content including spyware, viruses, trojan horses, phishing schemes, botnet command-and-control servers, and pornography featuring children, violence, bestiality, and incest. The FTC alleged that the defendant advertised its services in the darkest corners of the Internet, including a chat room for spammers.
Slashdot Mirror
And what's wrong with porn? The article makes it sound like its a bad thing. Why not mention how they were hosting images of children
What a coincidence, they were hosting images of children. Pornographic ones.
I know it when I see it.
Even if you include polygamy, *a marriage* is still a contract between one man and one woman. He may be married to more than one woman. A “family” may be one man + multiple wives, but a “marriage” is one of each.
Even if you throw out the reproductive purpose, it’s still always between one man and one woman.
I fail to see what the big fucking deal is, though. What’s wrong with just saying that marriage is a religious status, not a legal status? What’s wrong with making everyone get the same thing and calling it a civil union instead? What’s wrong with letting people continue to get married by their churches, since the government won’t be involved and gay-friendly churches can marry their couples and the churches who believe homosexuality is sin can claim that those marriages aren’t valid, and that’s perfectly okay because it’s a religious document with no force of law?
Bullshit.
Well yes, but I suppose there could have been a slim chance I was wrong.
You obviously care, so I feel relatively safe in assuming you voted. That leaves McCain, 45.7%, but I feel pretty safe in ruling him out as well (given your previous statement). That leaves 54.3% of the popular vote, of which Obama got 52.9%, leaving 1.4% third-party votes.
So, if you do all the math, there was a 2.65% chance I was wrong if I assumed you supported Obama.
Call me when Obama fixes that.
porn isn't illegal.
The kind that we’re talking about is.
What, didn’t you RTFA?
APK is better. Or crazier. Or both.
For the record, though, I mostly agree with you.
Oh, there's a grey area with older teens or younger-looking adults - Personally, I think the age of consent (for sex and for video/pictures) should be lowered to 14/16 or so (you know - the historical "move out and start your own life" age), but (for example) a video or picture of an adult having sex with an 8 year old is evidence of a rape, period, end of story. It cannot be tolerated, it will not be tolerated - in production, absolutely.
Agreed.
Basically, CP is an abomination that should be hunted down and destroyed with every legal and just method - with one caveat.
Agreed, with one caveat: hunt down the people who are making it. Unless the people who consume it can somehow help you find the people who are making it, going after them is just about as effective as it has been in the farce known as the war on drugs.
Someone real has to get hurt. Sketches of people don't hurt other people.
Agreed. Put the blame on the people who deserve it, though: the producers.
You can’t sell, consume, promote, or otherwise utilize a movie without inherently promoting its production. That’s why the MPAA encourages piracy of movies.~
-CP is produced. Someone purchases it and shares it online via file sharing. Other people download it from them, making the person that produced it happier as others find out to come to "jasonXXX8yrold" for more files. All people that downloaded it are supporting the production, because they are encouraging the distribution of the file.
You obviously do not know how this sort of thing works. The people who produce it do not want it widely distributed... as soon as it’s found by law enforcement, it’s a piece of potential evidence to find them and catch them. Hell, anonymous people on the internet tracked down a woman who stomped on a kitten with spike heels... do not underestimate the power of benign things.
-CP is produced. Someone purchases it, thereby supporting the person they got it from directly.
Those sort of things are carefully designed trades. They don’t deal with people they don’t trust, and they don’t trust people unless those people also abuse kids. There’s too much risk of being caught in a sting... and the imprudent ones who do stupid stuff like you described do get caught... which is why you think that they’re all like that, I suppose. It’s only the really clever ones who get away with it... and you don’t even know most of them exist.
-CP is produced. The producer places it online in a cloud-style system, and then monitors to see how many times it's been downloaded. Nobody pays for it, ever. But the producer gets a "good feeling" from being popular, so he continues to produce it.
They do not do it for the notoriety. That is absurd. They do it because they like abusing kids. The ones who do film it do so mostly just to share amongst themselves. If anything, when their materials do leak it just means they should be even more careful in the future because they don’t want law enforcement getting wind of them.
http://www.google.com/search?q=wikileaks+my+life+in
That doesn't take into account the fact that the pictures were taken without the child's consent (because the child can't consent).
Yes, actually, it does.
I think we can come to a reasonable middle ground here:
Clitoridectomy should be legal as long as the mother wants to have the fetal clit excised from the rest of the fetus while the fetal head is still inside the woman’s birth canal. It’s her body, after all.
Maybe you haven’t looked either.
And yes, I deliberately found a story on Fox News just to irritate you. At least Fox News is openly biased, unlike the source that you cited which hides its bias by pretending it’s just looking for truth.
Isn’t it funny how the most closed-minded people we know always seem to disagree with us?
Why stop at mammalian DNA? I’m sure there’s somebody out there with a turtle, snake, hamster, fish, iguana, rabbit, bird, or god-knows-what-else who’s willing to take a DNA sample and submit it in place of his own...
If you want to define marriage in that way, you pretty much have to accept that it is by definition a union between a man and a woman for the purposes of reproduction.
Which, as I’m sure you’re well aware, is considered a religious opinion, which is why I say it should be moved to the realm of religion, not law.
Non parent has a bunch of pictures of children (with a number of them barely dressed)
a set of pictures of a child in various poses (and clothing) being sold
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=children+stock+images
If you’re feeling really risque, add the search term “swimsuit”!!
Maybe it was redundant because he cleverly bolded the word “porn” to make it stand out and then pointed out the rather obvious fact that it was unlike the others?
And maybe something that’s otherwise somewhat redundant can be funny if you put it to a witty rhyme?
I’m sorry, I haven’t seen any “incontrovertible facts” indicating that Bush said things that he knew at the time to be false.
No reasonable person could look at the facts and consider Bush to be a better person than, say, Osama Bin Laden.
No reasonable person could look at that assertion and consider you to be anything but a left-wing nutjob.
The freedom of the person who’s looking at a picture and thinking something naughty.
The people who actually produced the stuff... the adults who abused kids to make porn... well, you apparently didn’t read his comment very well, because he already said you should go after them.
Spam can be a verb.
Because think about it.
That’s a dangerous way to start off an argument about something you know little about.
If CP was not so regulated and forbidden, there would be a lot less children harmed in the making of it. Since it is though, it has created a large economy dedicated to the production of it.
Ridiculous and untrue.
http://www.google.com/search?q=wikileaks+my+life+in
Because the “news snippet” is actually just the first 2 paragraphs of the article, copied verbatim, and the nature of the porn wasn’t mentioned until the 3rd paragraph:
The Federal Trade Commission today got a judge to effectively kill off the Internet Service Provider 3FN who the agency said specialized in spam, porn, botnets, phishing and all manner of malicious Web content.
The ISP's computer servers and other assets have been seized and will be sold by a court and the operation has been ordered give back $1.08 million to the FTC.
According to the FTC in June 2009, it charged that 3FN, which does business as Triple Fiber Network, APS Telecom, APX Telecom, APS Communications, APS Communication and Pricewert LLC, actively recruited and colluded with criminals to distribute harmful electronic content including spyware, viruses, trojan horses, phishing schemes, botnet command-and-control servers, and pornography featuring children, violence, bestiality, and incest. The FTC alleged that the defendant advertised its services in the darkest corners of the Internet, including a chat room for spammers.
This is Slashdot... what did you expect?