What constitutes a computer message that most of the members of your community would term as indecent or offensive?
To you, personally, what is the defference between pornography and something that is indecent or offensive?
2006-10-02 16:02:26 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
As with any question relating to morality, it is a very subjective concept. One man's art is another man's porn. One woman's poetry is another woman's indecent and offensive rant.
In this country, these terms are more and more being defined by the far-right conservatives. If it even threatens to impinge on their uptight religious views, then they want it banned from everyone...even those who don't deem it as offensive. These thought-police are striving to clean everything, whether the things are really dirty or not.
Bottom line: there is no clear definition. It is all in the eyes of the beholder. The danger is that the US is allowing a select few to be the eyes for everyone.
2006-10-02 16:12:13 · answer #1 · answered by Mr. Pink 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A computer message like Mark Foley used to a youthful male page telling him that he would like to take his clothes off and grab his private part (Not an exact quote to protect the innocent) is very indecent and offensive.
As for the definition of pornography? It's something that is designed and photographed in ways that do absolutely nothing but raise a person's sexual desires.
2006-10-02 16:07:51 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why do I have to be first to answer this? Maybe cause I'm addicted to this site? Offensive can be anything, including porn. Same with indecent. To me, porn is OK. In the wrong hands it can be harmful. So I have mixed feelings. My personal opinion, it should not be on the net. Constitutionally, it is OK.
I have no idea what others around me think of porn.. Not my business as long as they leave me alone.
OK< i'm second. Previous answer is a good definition as far as I am conce4ned.
2006-10-02 16:11:05 · answer #3 · answered by bob h 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is very difficult to say what would be offensive. What would not be objectionable in New York or San Francisco might kill someone in Lancaster County, PA. The legal definition of pornography is an image that is intended to arouse the prurient (sexual) interest and that has no redeeming social value. That might include the cover of Maxim in one part of the country and might not reach graphic gay porn in another. Therein lies the difficulty. In struggling over the legal definition, the late Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once said, I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.
2006-10-02 21:41:28 · answer #4 · answered by mattapan26 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it never seems to fail when the holy rolers and the moral crusaders shoot for legislation, they often fall by their own sword that they helped shaped. to that degree you must see such legislation with a bit of salt depending on who brings it to the table.
2006-10-02 17:47:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋