What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is this legal?

  • Thread starter Trapper7
  • Start date
  • #21
That is correct. I have a large roll of canvas with records of my father's family down to 1700s. Who was born, when they died, whom they married, their children and so on.
 
  • #22
back to the topic...

SEX.

I dont think anythings wrong about sex, sex ed, etc...but hard porn in front of kids is different. Im fine with normal sex talks, but having little Johnny ask you why that lady is tied to a tree...or rolling in mud with naked guys...*sigh*...is another, horrible, god awful thing all together. That gas staion should put a white sheet over that stuff with a sign on top or something...
 
  • #23
jeez obregon, which Circle Ks are you visiting? :p
 
  • #24
Dimka,
"Hashish" is simply concentrated cannabis resin glands, indicating an absence of vegetative material, this can be smoked or eaten. "Weed" is vegetative material (flowering tops) which has resin glands on it and is most often smoked. More traditionally in that region of the world however, Hashish is commonly referred to as Keif or Kif which is simply cannabis shaken with a sieve which produces a mixture of glands and some vegetative material. The bulk of the plant material is then discarded, the resin glands are what is important. This Kif is smoked widely in islamic areas where alcohol is forbidden. However ingestion in food is far different than smoking. These loose resin glands are easily introduced to foodstuffs, anything that is warmed (i.e. by cooking) is sufficient to make the alkaloids active, smoking is not a necessity and is infact the least psychoactive means of ingestion. If the resin glands are not pressed into the bricks for the smoking trade like you see on the TV news, in it's natural form it's just like grains of sugar. Consuming it this way (in food) is far longer lasting and much more powerful as it passes more slowly through the system. Traditional candies such as Majoun are hashish candies which have made their way into classical 19th century western literature. Large doses of eaten hashish create full blown psychedelic "trips" or "mystical experiences" similar to LSD, peyote and mushrooms. (Reportedly) markedly different effects than when it's smoked because of the longer blood/brain intereaction.

If you're interested enough, have a look at "Hashish" by Robert Clarke which is a thoroughly in depth and illustrated monograph of this phenomenon and how it differs from "weed" from prehistory, the middle ages and on to the present day.

Obre,
I'm not saying we should have kids watch Debbie does Dallas or anything like that however, they will eventually see something like that sooner or later and may ask you about it. Depending upon your relationship with the kids, if they talk to you or not - you'll have to provide an answer. Some kids don't ever communicate as equals with their parents which I think is very sad. I put this silence more on the parents attitudes of being an overlord than the kids not wanting to communicate. You may have to confront something like pornography with an answer. Not thinking of it, or hiding it doesn't make it not exist. What are you going to tell them if they ask about seeing something like that? If you freak out and make a fuss that can be the birth of a life-long "thing" about sex for them. There's no telling how that "thing" will develop later on but plenty of empirical evidence shows that the more sex is repressed in someones life and made "wicked" by their early imprints and conditioning the more criminal their later sexual behavior can become. I feel the less it is made into a "big deal" and paid only passing attention as just another interest of one part of the adult population the less it will become a major part of a kids psyche.

When I asked my parents what gay was (young kids throw that term around a lot without actually knowing what it is) they told me the facts but never said it was great nor did they say it was of the devil. A simple explanation is all it takes, kids can deduce the rest with their own faculties as to how this new information fits into the world as they understand it. Usually better than adults I find, who usually think they "have it all figured out" and throw fits when new ideas arise. Grasping at far reaching illogical conclusions of rare possibilities. Which I think is probably where adults get the idea kids can't handle new information. I don't believe that children's minds are the precious little porcelain dolls that will shatter with new information that we often think they are. The "innocence of childhood" is a myth and should be renamed the "ignorance of childhood" and I think ignorance should be combated at all stages of life. As questions arose in my youth my parents would answer without rhetoric or judgment and that, I feel was conducive to a good communicative relationship which continues to this day.
 
  • #25
on topic, the convienence store 3 houses down from me sells porn out in the open, about 4 ft from the candy kids buy.
I don't think they let kids look at any of the porn.
I don't have feelings either way on this. porn is porn, it's been around forever.
 
  • #26
I just don't think hard core porn set out right next to the counter that you pay at should be visible to kids, just like obregon said. This wasn't sex ed dvd's, it was XXX porn with very graphic pictures on the front. How come most video stores (that sell porn) have to put up a black curtain with a sign that says no children on it yet the gas station just lays it out for you. There is a porn booth at the Flea Market here, and they put up a huge black curtain with signs that say no kids allowed. I just think it's wrong. I don't have kids, but I know the last thing I want to talk about with "Jr" (No, not Dale Earnhardt Jr, either!) in a gas station is why there are women and men handcuffed and doing it on the front of a dvd cover with whips and chains in the background!
 
  • #27
hahaha all's that crossed my mind readin this is "talk about 'impulse buy' items eh"
HAHAHAHA
 
  • #28
Mabudon,
That's because YOU'RE part of the problem at large, "sir"!
(using my best conservative radio talk show host voice)

lol! J/K of course! :)


Trapper,
Whether you like it or not is not the real issue but rather what your kids will think you think about it and how you react to it can affect them deeply. What you have to decide is what you will tell your kids when they do see something like that, whether they're 5 or 15. How will you handle it? You don't seem to want to think about having "the discussion" at all at anytime but it's best to think about these things now before you do have children and are shocked when the time comes to explain this by not knowing what to say. Unfortunately, we can't pick and choose how our kids will be exposed to things we ourselves may not like, what we must do is understand how to calmly explain things when they do arise.

Like it or not, pornography (graphic depictions of sex) is a part of sexual human culture from at least the days of ancient Greece (painted on urns) until today. Only the media it is delivered upon is different but it's goal was always the same, titillation of the libido. When explaining that to a small child one can simply say "Some adults like to look at naked people." Why do they like looking at it? "I don't know." If you must interject some morality in the conversation it's best to simply say "I don't care for it myself, it's rather boring." You really needn't go into the B & D scene with them at the gas station. If stated matter of factly, without emotion or even batting an eyelash they will come away with the feeling it's no big deal, just another aspect of life.
 
  • #29
It isn't just sex. Pornography is an addiction. I have seen marriages literally ruined because either the husband or wife became absolutely consumed by pornography. And at the risk of being unpopular here, I for one think sex is sacred and is meant to be practiced under certain circumstances. I am of the mind that throwing it out for all to see cheapens it, is degrading and is abusing something that was intended to be something special.

Having magazines in plain sight of a 6 year old boy is unacceptable. The implications are too great and too much is at stake.
 
  • #30
Baylor, you are only illustrating the point of psychologists who're forced to confront these issues when they get overblown and begin ruining peoples lives. If we analyze the backgrounds of those who become addicted and more often than not, we'll find extreme emotional imprints and conditioning attached to the sex drives of these people who become so affected by pornography (or become sex addicts in general). As you pointed out, a fixation on sex is a definite problem as much as a fear of it. However, it's never as simple as someone seeing a playboy or naughty DVD and suddenly they're a flasher on the subway or involved some other criminal sexual activity. There are always effects of causation leading up to extremes in behavior.

It is not the images themselves which cause the neuroses.

As far as belief in the "sacredness" of sex or the human body in general, that's a metaphysical concept and like any metaphysical concept, this belief varies from person to person.
 
  • #31
I will never have children, Swords, so I do not need to worry about having that conversation. I think it's innapropriate to have porn out in plain site at a gas station(or anywhere else where children can go). That's just how I feel. If they can have them out at gas stations, does that mean they can have them at the county fair? I don't have a problem with them selling it, I have a problem with it not being behind a curtain or some place where kids can't see it. There should be limits.
 
  • #32
I have two little girls, and I have to say that Swords hit the nail on the head.

Baylorguy, your oppinion, I assume, is religious based. If you are basing that oppinon on the bible, or any religious text/ideology, it immediately renders your argument irrelevant in a court of law. The onus would be on you to produce EVIDENCE that the porn is harmful.

The idea that porn is an addiction is a straw man argument. No, it's not. Once CAN be addicted to it, but it is NOT an addiction in and of itself.

Alcohol and cigarets are out for all to see, and are far more addictive than porn since they have a chemical nature to them as well.

The idea there is that why should the masses, who can handle it responsible, suffer because the minority cannot?
 
  • #33
Swords, you've only traced your family back to a crusader in 1040? We've traced ours to a cyanobacter and archaeobacter who met near Greenland in 2,812,232,567 BP. Darned horizontal gene transfer makes it impossible to go back any further. One was named Adam and the other was Eve, but we aren't sure which was which. What was this thread about? Oh yeah, porn. I think a major reason many places keep it out of reach is so kids don't shoplift it. I guess that's doing double-duty in protecting the morals of youth.
 
  • #34
LOL! Herenorthere :)
Well, as I said, it was my Mormon relatives (great aunts/uncles) who live in Yucca Valley Cali. who are into that stuff and make that a mission of theirs. I don't know enough about Mormons and why they take interest in genealogy so much. Since my grandma has the stuff in boxes in her attic that they sent her she borrowed it to me for putting together the report.
 
  • #35
Mormons are into genealogy because they track their ancestors back through time so they can retroactively baptize them as Mormons. Imagine the surprise for someone like your crusader distant ancestor, who's having a relaxing glass of wine in Catholic heaven when *POOF* he suddenly reappears in Mormon heaven. He won't even be able to get a cup of coffee the next morning. Someone is going to get haunted for sure. It's never struck me as a good idea and I can't help but wonder about the repercussions.
 
  • #36
You are only illustrating the point of psychologists further Baylor. We need to analyze the backgrounds of those who become addicted and more often than not, we'll find extreme emotional imprints and conditioning attached to the sex drives of these people who become so affected by pornography (or become sex addicts in general). As you pointed out, a fixation on sex is a definite problem as much as a fear of it. However, it's never as simple as someone seeing a playboy or naughty DVD and suddenly they're a flasher on the subway or involved some other criminal sexual activity. There are always effects of causation leading up to extremes in behavior.

It is not the images themselves which cause the neuroses.

As far as belief in the "sacredness" of sex or the human body in general, that's a metaphysical concept and like any metaphysical concept, this belief varies from person to person.

Swords -

I agree this is a metaphysical concept. Some ancient religions had sex in the forefront of their culture for everyone to see and appeased their gods by having zealots have sexual relations in front of the statue. My own view is a steep departure from this other religion. This is my own view, and I consent that it is part of my specific worldview.

Just to ensure I understand where you are originating your point from, are you saying that allowing pornography to be displayed in the manner that this posts states is justified because we need the test subjects to look into the psychological implications?

Let us throw the addiction aspect of it to the curbside for now. Other studies that must be done (if not already) should look into any correlation between young adults that so often look at pornography and teenage pregnancies. The best possible chance to avoid STDs is to simply encourage a behavior of abstinence. Does having slack restrictions on pornography seem to support abstinence or is it counterproductive?
 
  • #37
I have two little girls, and I have to say that Swords hit the nail on the head.

Baylorguy, your oppinion, I assume, is religious based. If you are basing that oppinon on the bible, or any religious text/ideology, it immediately renders your argument irrelevant in a court of law. The onus would be on you to produce EVIDENCE that the porn is harmful.

The idea that porn is an addiction is a straw man argument. No, it's not. Once CAN be addicted to it, but it is NOT an addiction in and of itself.

Alcohol and cigarets are out for all to see, and are far more addictive than porn since they have a chemical nature to them as well.

The idea there is that why should the masses, who can handle it responsible, suffer because the minority cannot?


Granted, as I just posted to Swords. My opinion is deeply rooted in my worldview (religion). I feel pornorgraphy is correlated to many of the problems we have with young adults. Yes, addictions exist in other things that can destroy the body such as alchohol and cigarettes, and just like with pornography, I am not alone in wanting to have high standards. It has been a political discussion for years.

No, it won't stand in a court of law, but what is legal is not necessarily ethical. I take issue at times with what is deemed as "legal." I expected a response like yours, which is why I stated "At the risk of being unpopular."

The argument of the many being penalized because of the few is one I can't disprove; I will simply say the behavior itself is irresponsible (and i mean no offense to anyone who thinks otherwise).
 
  • #38
I think abstinence-based programs have been pretty thoroughly discredited.

As for porn, I have to confess that I really don't see the attraction. It was kind of embarassing when I moved into a fraternity my second semester of college and my new issues of Road & Track and Fur, Fish & Game stuck out like a sore thumb next to the stacks of Playboy and even more anatomical magazines the mailman delivered to seemingly everyone else. But I'm comfortable with it now and tell people I don't see the point of drooling my way through the photos in Gourmet magazine when there are so many good restaurants.
 
  • #39
Just to ensure I understand where you are originating your point from, are you saying that allowing pornography to be displayed in the manner that this posts states is justified because we need the test subjects to look into the psychological implications?
I'm sorry but I don't believe you're grasping what I'm saying at all.

Psychologists do not need to generate neuroses on a freelance basis, people are well equipped to produce their own from upbringings where something is considered verboten (talked about excessively, demonized and forbidden) and made into a taboo. Taboos can often lead to extreme behavior in many regards, not just sex, but drugs, alcohol, dating, music, tattoos, piercings, etc. Taboos are fun for kids to break as acts of rebellion but some of the larger ones such as sex can often become neuroses leading to dangerous activities later in life. Most particularly when the person begins to feel guilty for enjoying things he "knows" (i.e. believes) is wrong because of messages imprinted as a youth by his authority figures that "this is wrong, dirty, evil, wicked, etc". Yet his human nature keeps telling him it is perfectly natural to have these desires be they sexual or other forms of harmless natural amusement. Thus, this person's consciousness is in a constant struggle. This leads to a general unhappiness in life and the eventual acting out such as the destroyed marriages and as you describe, or rapes and worse that I mentioned.

Let me attempt to make this clearer for you, not making something into a taboo does not automatically mean praising it above all other concepts. and not giving age appropriate answers. This extreme jump from one end of the spectrum to the other is part of the prevailing western thought process which is known as "Aristotelian" or "either / or" logic.

Aristotelian logic (developed by Aristotle) states that if something is not completely good, it must be completely evil. If something is not white, it must be black, if you are anti-sex ed and also anti-porn and someone else is pro-sex ed ergo they must want to show pornography to children, etc. Everything in the either / or thought system is divided into stark metaphysical absolutes. This way of thinking leaves no room for learning or intellectual growth and can be the source of much neuroses. Much of the philosophy of everyday life in mixed cultures such as ours, is actually grey area and absolutes may be applicable to some but are not absolutes to others. As far as the gas station in question, if you know about it and have these hangups you always have option of not patronizing that particular station.

Abstinence Only "education" seems to me the effect of an ostrich sticking it's head in the sand believing that since he can't see danger, the danger is gone. I've always said the best sex education I ever got was when our 10th grade class went on a field trip to the STD clinic for a tour and description / slide show by one of the doctors. Talk about an eye opener! :)
 
  • #40
I have two little girls, and I have to say that Swords hit the nail on the head.

Baylorguy, your oppinion, I assume, is religious based. If you are basing that oppinon on the bible, or any religious text/ideology, it immediately renders your argument irrelevant in a court of law. The onus would be on you to produce EVIDENCE that the porn is harmful.

What evidence do you have that porn is not harmful? What is your opinion based on, use? It is undeniable that porn has a negative effect on Women ie. what they're supposed to look like and how they're supposed to act. I would NEVER expose my child, especially daughters to pornographic materials.

Lastly it isn't a mistake that the pornographic industry makes more money a year than professional baseball, basketball and football combined.

The idea that porn is an addiction is a straw man argument. No, it's not. Once CAN be addicted to it, but it is NOT an addiction in and of itself.

Explain the purpose of porn then. Isn't there something more to porn than just watching it like a sports show? Doesn't it create sexual arousal?

Isn't sex addictive? How isn't porn? Aren't they both means of gratification, which effect chemicals in the brain like a drug?

Alcohol and cigarets are out for all to see, and are far more addictive than porn since they have a chemical nature to them as well.

The brain, specifically the hypothalamus, does not have a drive for drinking alcohol or smoking cigarets, but guess what it does have? A drive for sex.

The idea there is that why should the masses, who can handle it responsible, suffer because the minority cannot?

How is it responsible to expose a child to pornographic content at a gas station? Responsibility would imply that pornography should be only accessible by adults of age who choose to partake. It saddens me that the majority of the people who responded in this thread sees nothing wrong with exposing minors, CHILDREN, to pornography.
 
Back
Top