P3D Re: XXX DDD

[Marvin Jones <Campfire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Message text written by INTERNET:photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>We're all not going to agree on anything- but without getting graphic, how
about defining as pornographic that which denegrates sexuality, rather than
uplifts it? Or, how about graphic sexuality that you'd rather your children
not see?<

The problem with these and virtually all other definitions in the
furtherance of censorship is that they call for subjective opinions. What
YOU think "denegrates" sexuality and what I think does are apt to be quite
different. What YOU'D rather you children didn't see is apt to be quite
different than what I'D rather. (And why must children always be a part of
the equation, anyway? Must no one ever be permitted access to anything that
isn't suitable for a 6-year-old?) In the final analysis, all censorship
works of the principal of someone in authority saying "Okay, here's what I
think is good and bad, and by god if you don't agree with me, I'm gonna
cram it down your stinkin' throat!"


------------------------------