(04-28-2014 03:29 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:27 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:24 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:18 PM)john01992 Wrote:  I hate to say it but we need to have an honest conversation about child porn laws. In this day & age with pictures being uploaded to the internet so easily and so many teens having camera phones it seems impossible to enforce.

In the eyes of the govt child porn is child porn and there really is no middle ground on that. Our child porn laws are so insane that getting caught possessing it gets you a sentence that is almost as tough as getting caught producing it.

I have heard of way too many stories with high schoolers getting nailed over child porn and being put on sex offenders list. We are at a point where these laws that are designed to protect children are hurting children as well.

I really don't know what to suggest. You have to protect the victims of CP. Now, to be specific to what you're talking about, if someone over 18 lifts a pic from a cellphone I think that should be possession. If a 16 year old girl does it and sends it to a friend and they post it on facebook, that should be distribution. But the girl who took the picture? I have no idea what to do about that.

What if the picture was taken by a parent just taking pictures of his kids?

I edited it to be more clear. Are you talking about normal pictures?

Baby taking a bath? Ive seen plenty of those on Facebook and Nirvana CDs.

(04-28-2014 03:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I've never heard of a nude family photo.

Clearly you do not live in the western United States. Nude family photos is a thing out there.

(04-28-2014 03:30 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I've never heard of a nude family photo.

We actually had a thread that presented one to us.

I thought dixie was the one who made that thread?

(04-28-2014 03:31 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:29 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:27 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:24 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:18 PM)john01992 Wrote:  I hate to say it but we need to have an honest conversation about child porn laws. In this day & age with pictures being uploaded to the internet so easily and so many teens having camera phones it seems impossible to enforce.

In the eyes of the govt child porn is child porn and there really is no middle ground on that. Our child porn laws are so insane that getting caught possessing it gets you a sentence that is almost as tough as getting caught producing it.

I have heard of way too many stories with high schoolers getting nailed over child porn and being put on sex offenders list. We are at a point where these laws that are designed to protect children are hurting children as well.

I really don't know what to suggest. You have to protect the victims of CP. Now, to be specific to what you're talking about, if someone over 18 lifts a pic from a cellphone I think that should be possession. If a 16 year old girl does it and sends it to a friend and they post it on facebook, that should be distribution. But the girl who took the picture? I have no idea what to do about that.

What if the picture was taken by a parent just taking pictures of his kids?

I edited it to be more clear. Are you talking about normal pictures?

Baby taking a bath? Ive seen plenty of those on Facebook and Nirvana CDs.

That was a baby swimming.

And no. I was talking about naked selfies or something of that type.

(04-28-2014 03:32 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I've never heard of a nude family photo.

Clearly you do not live in the western United States. Nude family photos is a thing out there.

You're kidding!

That's F-ing weird.

(04-28-2014 03:36 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:32 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I've never heard of a nude family photo.

Clearly you do not live in the western United States. Nude family photos is a thing out there.

You're kidding!

That's F-ing weird.

I agree I think liberals think it is "natural" or something like that.

(04-28-2014 03:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I've never heard of a nude family photo.

and that is mild compared to other ones you can see with a simple google search.

Holy hell!

(04-28-2014 03:44 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Holy hell!

In San Francisco, gay guys walk around nude. Portland Oregon has an annual gay bike ride with family participants getting in on the action.

(04-28-2014 03:41 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:36 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:32 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:28 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I've never heard of a nude family photo.

Clearly you do not live in the western United States. Nude family photos is a thing out there.

You're kidding!

That's F-ing weird.

I agree I think liberals think it is "natural" or something like that.

Liberals feel that it is ok for young boys to lay nude on their mothers and siblings.

this thread just got akward

(04-28-2014 03:54 PM)john01992 Wrote:  this thread just got akward

Yeah it was needing a new page pretty badly. Would you agree that the FCCs war on bad words on the radio is just silly?

(04-28-2014 04:26 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:54 PM)john01992 Wrote:  this thread just got akward

Yeah it was needing a new page pretty badly. Would you agree that the FCCs war on bad words on the radio is just silly?

silly & outdated.

sooner or later the FCC is gonna get nailed over freedom of speech and will be regulated back to only assigning channels.

(04-28-2014 04:26 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:54 PM)john01992 Wrote:  this thread just got akward

Yeah it was needing a new page pretty badly. Would you agree that the FCCs war on bad words on the radio is just silly?

Do you want your kids walking around saying s hit and **** at school and in public? Do you think we should respect people who want a society that doesn't resemble a rap video...or do you think everyone, including older Church going people should adhere to your fly-by-night- brand of anything-goes lifestyle?

(04-28-2014 04:31 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 04:26 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:54 PM)john01992 Wrote:  this thread just got akward

Yeah it was needing a new page pretty badly. Would you agree that the FCCs war on bad words on the radio is just silly?

Do you want your kids walking around saying s hit and **** at school and in public? Do you think we should respect people who want a society that doesn't resemble a rap video...or do you think everyone, including older Church going people should adhere to your fly-by-night- brand of anything-goes lifestyle?

Its an un winnable battle like the drug war imo. With internet kids are exposed to that language anyways. They just need to know that they cannot say it. And **** "church going" fascists that want to trample on the 1rst amendment they can eat a dic for all I care. And I do not say that as an insult against Christianity as I am a christian.

(04-28-2014 05:44 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 04:31 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 04:26 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:54 PM)john01992 Wrote:  this thread just got akward

Yeah it was needing a new page pretty badly. Would you agree that the FCCs war on bad words on the radio is just silly?

Do you want your kids walking around saying s hit and **** at school and in public? Do you think we should respect people who want a society that doesn't resemble a rap video...or do you think everyone, including older Church going people should adhere to your fly-by-night- brand of anything-goes lifestyle?

Its an un winnable battle like the drug war imo. With internet kids are exposed to that language anyways. They just need to know that they cannot say it. And **** "church going" fascists that want to trample on the 1rst amendment they can eat a dic for all I care. And I do not say that as an insult against Christianity as I am a christian.

Dixie is right, we shouldn’t give-in to a degenerate society.
Widespread is right, the cultural decay is unpreventable.

Either way, Christians overtly sowing discord is not the answer.

I raised my children not to use that kind of language.

(04-28-2014 05:56 PM)AngryAphid Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 05:44 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 04:31 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 04:26 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  

(04-28-2014 03:54 PM)john01992 Wrote:  this thread just got akward

Yeah it was needing a new page pretty badly. Would you agree that the FCCs war on bad words on the radio is just silly?

Do you want your kids walking around saying s hit and **** at school and in public? Do you think we should respect people who want a society that doesn't resemble a rap video...or do you think everyone, including older Church going people should adhere to your fly-by-night- brand of anything-goes lifestyle?

Its an un winnable battle like the drug war imo. With internet kids are exposed to that language anyways. They just need to know that they cannot say it. And **** "church going" fascists that want to trample on the 1rst amendment they can eat a dic for all I care. And I do not say that as an insult against Christianity as I am a christian.

Dixie is right, we shouldn’t give-in to a degenerate society.
Widespread is right, the cultural decay is unpreventable.

Either way, Christians overtly sowing discord is not the answer.

Always so insightful AA but I guess it is bound to happen once you reach the ripe old age of 92 I feel like when problems and people are left to their own device things have their own way of working out. IE natural order. For something as marginal as cuss words in the media it is a battle not worth fighting and is a waste of resources. I think a channel taking a moral stand and not using profane language would have a more positive effect on society than beating them into submission imo.

I'm against all morality laws. I only support laws to prevent fraud, harm to persons, or harm to property. Anything else should not be a law. In a free society, everything is allowed so long as your acts don't harm another or their property. If you disagree with the immoral acts of another, ostracize them, use your free speech to denounce them. Don't send them to prison because you find it offensive. If it doesn't "pick your pocket or break your leg", it shouldn't matter to you.

(04-28-2014 06:15 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  I'm against all morality laws. I only support laws to prevent fraud, harm to persons, or harm to property. Anything else should not be a law. In a free society, everything is allowed so long as your acts don't harm another or their property. If you disagree with the immoral acts of another, ostracize them, use your free speech to denounce them. Don't send them to prison because you find it offensive. If it doesn't "pick your pocket or break your leg", it shouldn't matter to you.

That's great but most laws based on morality blur that line.

Take for example age of consent, child porn, and the works. That's 'morale' law.