Victimless crimes

***azalea*** · 06-11-2002, 09:41 PM

There is nothing immoral about nudity. I have no problem with nudity or skimpy clothing. Heck, the porn industry is part of the CAUSE of that being seen as immoral! It has to do with what the PURPOSE is -- a nude figure as art is beautiful, a magazine with photos shot for the purpose of sexual self gratification is harmful. I would love to walk around in this 90 degree heat without a shirt on -- too bad for me pornographers have made my breasts something "dirty" and "nasty" in the eyes of many men (who like the "dirtiness" and "nastiness"). This is not a moral issue (although I do have thoughts on the matter as a moral issue as well), it is a social issue. I mean why is it okay for women to be portrayed in pornography, but it isn't okay for computer images of children to be used? Just how far are you willing to let things go so that each and every person can get his jollies and another person can make a buck off of it?

Any reasonable person can see the difference between porn and art/ literature. Do you really think that the founding fathers wrote the Bill of Rights for that? Please!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Iraqis Forgive Americans	Radagast	General Messages	166	06-07-2004 09:25 PM
Saddam Hussein captured!	Jonathan	General Messages	49	12-22-2003 12:25 PM
Frodo Baggins Charged With War Crimes	AACHOO	Lord of the Rings Books	22	01-12-2003 01:10 AM

06-11-2002, 09:41 PM	#11
*azalea* Long lost mooter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 3,342	There is nothing immoral about nudity. I have no problem with nudity or skimpy clothing. Heck, the porn industry is part of the CAUSE of that being seen as immoral! It has to do with what the PURPOSE is -- a nude figure as art is beautiful, a magazine with photos shot for the purpose of sexual self gratification is harmful. I would love to walk around in this 90 degree heat without a shirt on -- too bad for me pornographers have made my breasts something "dirty" and "nasty" in the eyes of many men (who like the "dirtiness" and "nastiness"). This is not a moral issue (although I do have thoughts on the matter as a moral issue as well), it is a social issue. I mean why is it okay for women to be portrayed in pornography, but it isn't okay for computer images of children to be used? Just how far are you willing to let things go so that each and every person can get his jollies and another person can make a buck off of it? Any reasonable person can see the difference between porn and art/ literature. Do you really think that the founding fathers wrote the Bill of Rights for that? Please!