Save The Children!

[Just-Jude]

Is David Cameron using the hysterical propaganda from childrens charities about paedophiles, in an attempt to censor and control the internet?

[boxtops]

You said it's up to us to decide whether we want it or not - it shouldn't be there in the first place.

[hc4361]

Your opening post refers to paedophiles. Your later post states:
"Adults should be left to decide what's good or bad for them."


It seems very clear to me what you meant.

[mikey4444]

jude...you are talking drivel.

[mikey4444]

No, what you said jude was :::: Adults should be left to decide what's good or bad for them.

You are either for or against child porn being on the internet. Make your mind up and stop talking drivel.

I am on record here on AB of being far from a Tory voter but if Dave is trying to do something about child porn, then he has my vote, on this issue at least.

[Just-Jude]

You can't argue a point, so you say I'm talking drivel.

[mikey4444]

If you are making an argument for allowing child porn to be on the internet, then yes...you are talking drivel, and dangerous drivel at that.

[modeller]

//jude...you are talking drivel. //

Yes but thats his motive.

[sandyRoe]

Can it be legal in any country to provide paedophile porn?

[Just-Jude]

If you see child porn...will you rush out and attack children?
If you see a car advert...do you rush to a garage?
If you see a sandy beach...do you rush out and book a holiday?
If you see a food advert...do you rush to the supermarket?

Of course you don't! This proves that porn has little or no effect on anyone. It's all perceived threats, but it makes Cameron look good in the eyes of those who don't know any better.

[hc4361]

As the age of consent varies between countries, then some of what we consider child porn may be legal in other countries.

[sandyRoe]

Doesn't child porn have a very real effect on the unfortunate children who feature in it?
Reason enough, I'd say, to try and get rid of it.

[boxtops]

Rubbish, jude. The last 3 - yes, otherwise which would companies advertise? you don't have to do it immediately, but it puts the thought into your head.

Why would any sane person want to look at perverted pictures of minors (including babies and toddlers) being raped and degraded, please tell me that? If that's not what you mean by child porn, what do you mean?

[Sharingan]

I'm not sure any of that is the point, just because the majority of people who see it are nothing but revolted by it, does not mean it ought to be freely available. Just because it does not increase the number of paedophile there are does not mean it's a victimless image. there is a victim. We ought to be trying to curtail that. I think this is silly posteruing by the Government but I do think that these peoiple should be tracked down and dealt with very severly.

[hc4361]

Jude, you are being provocative. There are many studies that show some forms of pornography adversely affect behaviour, especially when viewed by minors or young adults.

If you think child pornography is acceptable you are twisted

[Just-Jude]

Not as twisted as Cameron, who will support any group of nutters if he thinks there's votes in it!

[hc4361]

So in your opinion children's charities who object to child porn are nutters?

[boxtops]

That's a feeble answer, jude - this needs to be done, you seem to think it's all right for children and young people to be abused in the name of "entertainment"- you've not said otherwise.

[Just-Jude]

Childrens charities come up with this nonsense all the time, it keeps them in the limelight.

[boxtops]

Jude, as others have said, you are talking cobblers. If you don't believe there is a serious industry in child porn, you're wrong.

[mikey4444]

Still more drivel from Jude ! I'm off to bed !