Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Predators & Pornography. A disturbing link.
NRO ^ | May 19, 2005, 8:15 a.m. | By Penny Nance

Posted on 05/19/2005 11:05:47 AM PDT by .cnI redruM

On February 2, 2003, when seven-year-old Danielle van Dam disappeared from her family home in the middle of the night, every mother’s nightmare was played out on national television for almost a month while authorities searched for the girl. When Danielle’s body was found at the end of that month, the police and prosecutors discovered a frightening story about a neighbor of Danielle’s who had computer files filled with child pornography and even a sickening cartoon video of the rape of a young girl.

According to a report by Robert Peters, president of Morality in Media, on the link between pornography and violent sex crimes, the prosecutor in the Danielle van Dam case said “The video represented [the defendant’s] sexual fantasies and inspired the abduction, rape, and murder of Danielle.” According to Raymond Pierce, a retired NYPD detective who worked on the sex-crimes squad for many years and is now a criminal-profiling consultant, about 80 percent of rapists and serial killers are heavy pornography users. I was a victim of an attempted rape by a disturbed man who turned out to be involved in pornography.

May is Victims of Pornography Month. Today Senator Sam Brownback (R., Kan.), Rep. Katherine Harris (R., Fla.), Rep. Joe Pitts (R., Pa.), and leaders from the values community will participate in a summit to explore the troubling connection between pornography and violence against women and children.

Florida attorney general Charlie Crist advises parents that “we must never lose sight of the fact that sexual predators make the online world a dangerous place for innocent children. Parents must be ever-vigilant to make sure their children are not exposed to images and messages that would have been unthinkable just a generation ago.” Crist warns that we cannot allow the Internet to be a “pipeline for pornography aimed at children.” But while parents can use available means to protect their children when they are in their own homes, there is a cultural climate surrounding our children that threatens them the way Danielle van Dam was threatened. Because of the availability of pornography online, there is no way of knowing what lurks in the hearts of our neighborhoods.

More needs to be done to evaluate the connection between violent predatory behavior and pornography, and to crack down on these violent predators. Police and law-enforcement officers across the country report brutal instances in which those addicted to pornography utilized its sadistic images on their female and child victims.

Just this past February, the New York Times reported a story about a teenage babysitter who had raped three young children he was watching in their homes. According to the Times, his pattern was to watch pornographic videos with the oldest of the children, a 12-year-old boy, and intimidate them all by torturing them with a knife and threats to their family members. Perhaps one of the most notorious serial killers, Ted Bundy, participated in an interview with Dr. James Dobson shortly before he was executed. In the interview, Bundy explained, “I’ve lived in prison for a long time now. And I’ve met a lot of men who were motivated to commit violence like me. And without exception, every one of them was deeply involved in pornography — without exception, without exception — deeply influenced and consumed by an addiction to pornography.”

Since 1956, the Supreme Court has made clear that the First Amendment does not protect obscene materials. If we know from the perpetrators themselves how obscenity contributes to violence against women and children, what can we do?

We need to fund more studies of the addiction to pornography and its effects on violent behavior. Parents can install filters on any computer used by children and keep the family computer in a central location, not in a child's bedroom or someplace where parents might not regularly see it. We need to demand tougher law enforcement on the state and federal level. The Bush administration is stepping up federal enforcement of obscenity laws. This is a good first step. Contact the U.S. attorney for your district and ask what they are doing to enforce the laws. We need tougher state penalties against both possession and distribution of child porn and passing any kind of pornographic material to kids. Experts indicate that pornography is often used by pedophiles to break down the resistance of child victims. Parents should check out their state’s penalties for child rape and make sure offenders are going to jail and staying there for these offenses. Florida, for example, just passed a tough new law after the tragedy involving Jessica Lunsford, whose killer was a recently released violent offender. We should pass legislation to address the threat to children on the Internet. This includes chat sites, websites, spam, and peer-to-peer networks. Peer-to-Peer networks are of particular concern because they are widely visited by kids and offer porn for free without any age verification.

As Rep. Katherine Harris has pointed out, "Pornography displays human beings as objects, obliterating the wall between an individual's sick fantasies and the compulsion to act upon them. Often, the monsters who hurt women and children start with this malignant desensitizer." We need to all work together to find better ways to protect women and children against this violence.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: amencorner; artorsmut; daniellevandam; mim; needlebutts; porn; violence
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 451-500501-550551-600601-645 last
To: laredo44
The founders of this nation would disagree with you. The purpose of government, as explained in our declared independence from Britain, is to protect rights.

When was the last time you read the preamble to the Constitution?
601 posted on 05/20/2005 12:34:17 PM PDT by Antoninus (Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Hosanna in excelsis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 598 | View Replies]

To: Melas
I'd take it more seriously if it didn't have that whopping $99 sign up fee. These jokers could care less about you or your addiction, it's your hundred bucks that interests them.

How much do you suppose a good certified marriage & family therapist charges per hour? $99 sounds like a bargain.
Of course, if a guy doesn't get help, he'll probably end up paying over $200 an hour for a lawyer after his wife serves him with divorce papers.

602 posted on 05/20/2005 12:43:52 PM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 482 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Since when is the truth liberal? If one has to believe that everything before us were perfect in order to be conservative, then count me out. Of course, I don't think you believe that at all. I think you just said what you said in lieu of an intelligent response.


603 posted on 05/20/2005 12:44:31 PM PDT by Melas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 547 | View Replies]

To: XR7

Betcha the guy can go to his pastor for free, and if he doesn't have one, he can find one free too.


604 posted on 05/20/2005 12:56:49 PM PDT by Melas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 602 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus; scripter; EdReform; little jeremiah
What is homosexual sex but mutual masturbation anyway? Just trading one man's hand for another. Pretty sick if you ask me.

And that is why porn addicts will so vehemently object to your point of view. They know in their heart that you are right, but they cannot bear to admit that the perversion they lust after makes them more like homos than woman-satisfying real men.

605 posted on 05/20/2005 12:56:53 PM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 492 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

It would be indentured servitude and not slavery. The real distinction between slavery and indentured servitude is that offspring of slaves are slaves, and the offspring of the indentured are free.


606 posted on 05/20/2005 12:59:55 PM PDT by Melas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 590 | View Replies]

To: JeffAtlanta; Antoninus
Remove the theocons from the GOP and democratic party dies.

What an absurdly ignorant statement.
It was so-called "theocons" that founded this free republic. It was the rallying of "theocons" that brought Ronald Reagan to power and continue to grow the Republican party through the grass roots. Most leftists who become conservatives end up doing so out of religious conviction. Get rid of the "theocons" and the Republican party withers, and we can kiss our free republic good-bye.

Of course, I know you will not understand that. It was one of Ronald Reagan's most trusted advisors who conducted the most comprehensive investigation on how destructive pornography is - at President Reagan's directive. Besmirch the Reagan legacy if you will, and you only show your true colors.

607 posted on 05/20/2005 1:07:06 PM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 497 | View Replies]

To: arasina; .cnI redruM
There have always been predators, child molesters and killers. They just didn't get the publicity in the past that they do now.

Typical leftisit propaganda straight out of the Marxist/PC/RDDB playbook.

608 posted on 05/20/2005 1:10:42 PM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 509 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
When was the last time you read the preamble to the Constitution?

About six months ago. When was the last time you read the Declaration of Independence?

609 posted on 05/20/2005 1:11:40 PM PDT by laredo44 (Liberty is not the problem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 601 | View Replies]

To: XR7
They know in their heart that you are right

Not really. The opinion that someone lusting after porn women is a homosexual is just plain weird. For the vast majority of men who enjoy heterosexual porn, any images of homosexual sex would be a pretty quick turnoff.

but they cannot bear to admit that the perversion they lust after makes them more like homos than woman-satisfying real men.

Um, when a guy watches porn, he is lusting after the porn girls. Whatever other issues there might be with that in terms of morality, homosexuality is not one of them.

Only in your bizarro world does lusting after buxom female porn stars make one a homosexual. Weird.

610 posted on 05/20/2005 1:12:32 PM PDT by Modernman ("Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 605 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
No, but they engage in prostitution, which is evil.

As do the "actors" in pornographic movies.
If you pay to watch the movie, you are a "john."

611 posted on 05/20/2005 1:18:12 PM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 548 | View Replies]

To: XR7

Prostitution is the combination of sex and capitalism.

Which of these two things don't you like?


612 posted on 05/20/2005 1:19:49 PM PDT by Modernman ("Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 611 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus; Publius Valerius
As for St. Paul, he is not Jesus.

The standard argument used by the Metropolitan Community Church and homosexuality advocates.

613 posted on 05/20/2005 1:24:10 PM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 568 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
Prostitution is the combination of sex and capitalism.

Prostitution and capitalism are both forms of idolatry.

614 posted on 05/20/2005 1:32:36 PM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 612 | View Replies]

To: XR7

You're opposed to capitalism, too?

Where are we getting these newbies these days?


615 posted on 05/20/2005 1:56:26 PM PDT by Modernman ("Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 614 | View Replies]

To: Modernman

XR7 wrote: Prostitution and capitalism are both forms of idolatry.

You Wrote: You're opposed to capitalism, too?

Where are we getting these newbies these days?

My reply: So XR7 believes that Capitalism is idolatry, hmmm I will read his/her posts with a more critical eye.

Actually Modernman, I think you offered the best debate on the topic. AND I still am opposed to porn, think that people who consume it do so at theri own peril, it is a poor substituition for human contact and interaction.

BUT in this country we don't want government running our lives. At first f I could be shown a direct corralation between porn and crime I think I could have justified a ban. However the web statistics clearly show that much to my surprise porn is a lot bigger product than I thought it was.

If it is consumed/watched by so many millions, and 99.9% of the consumers are not out committing sex crimes or other crimes then you can't really deny the public their right to have porn if they want it. There is no statistical correlation between porn and crime. We just don't go around banning everything that is not good for you. The sickos who can't handle it and go out and commit crimes, they probablyw ould have done so anyway, porn or no porn.

When I brought up "home movies" between a married couple none of the anti-porn people could manage a decent argument that this variety of porn should be banned. I mean if you are going to ban porn, then you ban it all, right? If personal porn is okay with 'yall then what really is the difference between personal porn and public porn? Both versions are, "caught on tape"

As a closing thought things that are done in the privacy of your own homes, between consenting adults are really nobody elses business. 'Taint my bidness.

Now let's ban violent movies, which I think are even worse than porn. Also I think we should ban music which encourages violence, particually against wimmin. Some of the music is so slutty it makes you want to throw up. If we are going to ban somethings, then I go for violent movies and slutty music. Once those 2 are banned we can come back and talk about if porn should next be up on the top of the "Let's ban this" list. Porn is not on the public airwaves, nobody is exposed to it unless they actively go look for it, I am on the internet all the time and I have never found it, EVER, I guess if thaaaaats what some people want, well okay, I'm protected from not having to see it.


616 posted on 05/20/2005 4:23:35 PM PDT by ExPatInFrance (Terri's Starfish- 1 Mrs. Ora Mae Magouirk, 2 Clara Martinez)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 615 | View Replies]

To: XR7

"What is homosexual sex but mutual masturbation anyway? Just trading one man's hand for another. Pretty sick if you ask me.

And that is why porn addicts will so vehemently object to your point of view. They know in their heart that you are right, but they cannot bear to admit that the perversion they lust after makes them more like homos than woman-satisfying real men."

Whoa. That's what you get for arguing with a moron. Moronic responses. Pointing the finger and calling somebody gay is undignified when John Kerry does it. When a conservative does it, it's an embarrassment to us all. Can't it be perverse on its own merits without you linking it to gayness? Do you touch yourself with rubber gloves when you pee, or are you into" golden showers" and "watersports"? Retard logic.


617 posted on 05/20/2005 4:25:22 PM PDT by Bird Jenkins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 605 | View Replies]

To: XR7

I happen to know several very nice homosexual men and women and I have news for you, they are not homosexual becasue of watching porn!


618 posted on 05/20/2005 4:33:32 PM PDT by ExPatInFrance (Terri's Starfish- 1 Mrs. Ora Mae Magouirk, 2 Clara Martinez)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 605 | View Replies]

To: Bird Jenkins

Bird, I would appreciate it very much if you would not use the word, "retard" I know I am going to sound horribly lefty for writing this and I really am NOT, but please consider if it is good taste. There are many people who are cognitivly disabled, and "retard" is a word that is painfull and hurts families who have a family member who is cognitively disabled.

Moron, I'll give you moron and I also agree with your opinion!


619 posted on 05/20/2005 4:40:29 PM PDT by ExPatInFrance (Terri's Starfish- 1 Mrs. Ora Mae Magouirk, 2 Clara Martinez)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 617 | View Replies]

To: ExPatInFrance

Sorry for my insensitivity, ExPatInFrance.

You're right, I should have thought of a better way to express myself.


620 posted on 05/20/2005 4:49:15 PM PDT by Bird Jenkins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 619 | View Replies]

To: Bird Jenkins
Thanks bird! I do agree that XR7 holds moronic viewpoints. I mean he/she said Capitalism is idolatry!
621 posted on 05/20/2005 4:57:20 PM PDT by ExPatInFrance (Terri's Starfish- 1 Mrs. Ora Mae Magouirk, 2 Clara Martinez)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 620 | View Replies]

To: XR7
Typical leftisit propaganda straight out of the Marxist/PC/RDDB playbook.

LOL! That's a new one for me. I'm not into censorship so that makes me a Marxist? Just wait until they come for your choice of books or websites, XR7; you'll be singing an entirely different tune.

622 posted on 05/20/2005 7:33:08 PM PDT by arasina (So there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 608 | View Replies]

To: Melas
It would be indentured servitude and not slavery. The real distinction between slavery and indentured servitude is that offspring of slaves are slaves, and the offspring of the indentured are free.

What if the contract stipulated that as well?
623 posted on 05/20/2005 8:50:08 PM PDT by Antoninus (Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Hosanna in excelsis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 606 | View Replies]

To: ExPatInFrance
I happen to know several very nice homosexual men and women and I have news for you, they are not homosexual becasue of watching porn!

No, they are most likely homosexual because they were molested by homosexual men in their youth. That's the sad story behind about 90% of men afflicted with homosexual attractions.
624 posted on 05/20/2005 8:53:30 PM PDT by Antoninus (Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Hosanna in excelsis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 618 | View Replies]

To: Melas
Since when is the truth liberal?

You've got a strange version of the truth if you think that unlimited access to pornography is all part of the march of "freedom." That is a notion straight out of the far left's playbook dating back before the 1960s. I've already quoted the "Current Communist Goals" twice on this thread. It truly is unnerving to see how many people have bought into that garbage even when the facts regarding the attempted societal brain-washing are displayed right before your eyes. Comparing the "right" to buy, own, and masturbate to pornography with the right of a black person to be free from slavery, or the right of a woman to vote is quite ludicrous, don't you think? I don't think it'll go down in history as one of the high-points of human "freedom."

As I've said over and over again, no one has the God-given freedom to commit a harmful, gross, immoral, or self-destructive act. That's license, not freedom.
625 posted on 05/20/2005 9:06:36 PM PDT by Antoninus (Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Hosanna in excelsis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 603 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
You've got a strange version of the truth if you think that unlimited access to pornography is all part of the march of "freedom."

This is where you keep getting it wrong, over and over again. I've never said I wanted unlmited access to pornography. What I want is intelligent discourse about where the lines should be drawn. Hard and fast lines, not something nebulous like "back to 1957". I want to know where folks stand, what exactly would have to go etc.

626 posted on 05/20/2005 10:48:25 PM PDT by Melas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 625 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
This is sophistical and not worthy of a response.

Because it destroys your argument that any graphic representation of sexuality -porn- is inherently "lustful" and therefore biblically proscribed.

Who determines when craving becomes "inordinate?". Your definition of lust places limits on how much one can enjoy the act, in marriage - absurd.

Look up "inordinate."

Look up "pretentious".

627 posted on 05/21/2005 12:42:36 AM PDT by xsrdx (Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM
Predators & Pornography. A disturbing link.

Predators got porn??

How do they see what the chick Predator is trying to show, with those invisibility suits?

628 posted on 05/21/2005 12:47:55 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Not Elected Pope Since 4/19/2005.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aliska
I haven't gotten any of those for a loooooooong time. I used to chuckle over those while I deleted them.

Guess I should have left well enough alone. They got my "number" again. Two showed up in my mailbox the next morning from Sussanah and Andrew, offering the usual enhancement to an anatomical piece of equipment I don't possess.

Got a couple of more of those since then

More disburbing is that I have gotten a couple child porn spams. I've never gotten those before. Guess I'll have to pester some people I prefer to leave alone about the second one.

629 posted on 05/21/2005 11:31:26 AM PDT by Aliska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 422 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
>Post hoc ergo propter hoc violation. Every single one of >those predators also drank water and ate bread at some >point in their lives. This does not mean that bread and >water drove them to predation.
>

True. This is the usual stuff that totally fails to distinguish cause/effect.

Normally, this kind of thing is from the intellectual left who want to ban something / pursue their own interests.

They are very keen on seeing themselves as the defenders of innocents and using 'harm to innocents' to camouflage their agenda. The going gets tough when Saddam Hussein is the "innocent".
630 posted on 05/23/2005 12:56:56 AM PDT by PzGr43
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

People into porno are about as bad as sexual predators. Both also feel what they're doing is morally acceptable.


631 posted on 05/23/2005 1:08:07 AM PDT by k2blader ("A kingdom of conscience ... That is what lies at the end of Crusade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xsrdx
Because it destroys your argument that any graphic representation of sexuality -porn- is inherently "lustful" and therefore biblically proscribed.

A mirror is a "graphic representation of sexuality"? It's "pornography"?

graph·ic ( P ) Pronunciation Key (grfk)
adj. also graph·i·cal (--kl)

1.
a.) Of or relating to written representation.
b.) Of or relating to pictorial representation.

The essence of pornography is the fact that it is a tangible representation of sexual imagery.

por·nog·ra·phy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pôr-ngr-f)
n.

1. Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.

Who determines when craving becomes "inordinate?".

Who determines when a craving for a Twinkie becomes inordinate? The determination depends on particular circumstances. The difficulty in determining the dividing line doesn't obviate the difference in principle between ordinate and inordinate desire.

Your definition of lust places limits on how much one can enjoy the act, in marriage - absurd.

If it's so absurd, then it should be easy for you to explain to me why lust is impossible in marriage.

632 posted on 05/23/2005 7:23:09 AM PDT by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 627 | View Replies]

To: k2blader
People into porno are about as bad as sexual predators. Both also feel what they're doing is morally acceptable.

The difference, as you well know, is that everyone involved in the production and consumption of legal pornography is a consenting adult.

Comparing private, consensual adult viewing of pornography to rape or child molestation just makes you look foolish.

633 posted on 05/23/2005 7:47:59 AM PDT by Modernman ("Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 631 | View Replies]

To: ExPatInFrance
think that people who consume it do so at theri own peril, it is a poor substituition for human contact and interaction.

I agree with you. Porn is like any other adult vice- it can lead to bad consequences for the individuals involved, but since they are adults such consequences are their's to live with.

634 posted on 05/23/2005 7:52:45 AM PDT by Modernman ("Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 616 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
If it's so absurd, then it should be easy for you to explain to me why lust is impossible in marriage.

Certainly it's possible - in a dysfunctional, pseudo-marriage.

In a loving marriage, where both partners are in agreement, only Catholics would posit that you can be too hot for each other.

The difficulty in determining the dividing line doesn't obviate the difference in principle between ordinate and inordinate desire.

That's an elegant sentence. Only on FR.

635 posted on 05/23/2005 8:27:21 AM PDT by xsrdx (Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 632 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
As I've said over and over again, no one has the God-given freedom to commit a harmful, gross, immoral, or self-destructive act.

Reality shows this to be an utterly false statement.

Obviously God gave us the freedom to commit harmful, gross, immoral and self destructive acts. If not, they'd be impossible.

Under Lucifer's plan, rejected by God, all such acts would have been impossible, thus guaranteeing the "salvation" of all.

Of course, free will, one of God's greatest gifts, goes right out the window.

636 posted on 05/23/2005 8:54:09 AM PDT by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 625 | View Replies]

To: xsrdx
In a loving marriage, where both partners are in agreement, only Catholics would posit that you can be too hot for each other.

Here's a simple example. When couples choose to sterilize themselves temporarily (using "birth control") and engage in intercourse, they are lying with their bodies, on the one hand, acting in "union" but at the same time rejecting the natural flowering of that expression. Such a sexual union is like masturbation in that it is a selfish, self-directed choice for the pleasure of intercourse without regard for the proper object of intercourse, similar to binging and purging.

637 posted on 05/23/2005 10:55:18 AM PDT by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 635 | View Replies]

To: Modernman

People into porno, like you, probably, will try to justify it in many ways.


638 posted on 05/23/2005 10:58:21 AM PDT by k2blader ("A kingdom of conscience ... That is what lies at the end of Crusade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 633 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

The problem with pornography is that you constantly have to be "upping" the sexual level of the photos, in order to get the same satisfaction.
It's just like a drug.
This is why many people eventually get into gay or child porn.


639 posted on 05/23/2005 11:03:22 AM PDT by mowkeka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

The title could as easily read: "Watching baseball and sexual predators; a disturbing link."

You can create a link between anything popular and anything unsavory. Doesn't mean the link is scientifically valid.

My money is on childhood sexual abuse by a sexual predator as the leading cause for creating sexual predators.


640 posted on 05/23/2005 11:03:51 AM PDT by IamConservative (To worry is to misuse your imagination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: k2blader
People into porno, like you, probably, will try to justify it in many ways.

There is no need to justify the use of one's rights. So long as my viewing or reading of particular material harms no one, I do not need to justify such viewing or reading. Do you have to justify your right of religious expression or your right to bear arms to anyone?

You are the one who appears to be proposing curtailments of my rights. The onus is on you to justify why such curtailment is Constitutional. I do not need to justify anything.

641 posted on 05/23/2005 11:06:24 AM PDT by Modernman ("Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 638 | View Replies]

To: ExPatInFrance

Fair enough. To equate someone who is mentally disabled through no fault of their own with someone (e.g. XR7) who (presumably) is capable of rational thought but declines to engage in it is terribly unfair to the former.


642 posted on 05/25/2005 9:59:35 AM PDT by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 619 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
The real distinction between slavery and indentured servitude is that offspring of slaves are slaves, and the offspring of the indentured are free.
What if the contract stipulated that as well?

By definition, a valid contract involves the signatories. I could sign a "contract" requiring Bill Clinton to tell the truth from now on, but it would not be binding on him.

643 posted on 05/25/2005 10:01:09 AM PDT by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 623 | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan
When couples choose to sterilize themselves temporarily (using "birth control") and engage in intercourse, they are lying with their bodies, on the one hand, acting in "union" but at the same time rejecting the natural flowering of that expression.

When people choose to numb their pain sense temporarily (using "anesthesia") and permit themselves to be cut open, they are lying with their bodies, on the one hand, submitting to "surgery" but at the same time rejecting the natural result of that action.

(Nope, you don't get to dismiss this as a strawman -- that very argument was, in fact, advanced in all sincerity on religious grounds.)

644 posted on 05/25/2005 10:03:59 AM PDT by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 637 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
By definition, a valid contract involves the signatories. I could sign a "contract" requiring Bill Clinton to tell the truth from now on, but it would not be binding on him.

Bill Clinton is not legally underage nor are you his legal guardian...
645 posted on 05/25/2005 10:53:32 AM PDT by Antoninus (Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Hosanna in excelsis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 643 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 451-500501-550551-600601-645 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson