Should all porn be banned?

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 95
Topic's author
#1
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,640
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
Now, I do believe there is an argument to be made here.

P1) Exposing children to sexuality harms children
C) Children shouldnt be exposed to sexuality
P2) If exposing children to sexuality harms children, then children shouldnt be exposed to sexuality.

Porn is an exposure to sexuality. Therefore, children who see porn would be exposed to sexuality.

P1) If porn being available on internet harms children, then all porn should be banned
P2) Porn being available on the internet harms children
C) All porn should be banned

We know that children sometimes find porn at a very young age.

P1) If the only way to reduce the exposure of children to porn to the minimum is to ban all porn, then all porn should be banned.
P2) The only way to reduce the exposure of children to porn to the minimum is to ban all porn
C) All porn should be banned

As long as porn is easily available, some children will find it and be harmed by it.

So basically, the only way for you to argue against this is to say that something that harms children should be allowed due to your pleasure lmao

#2
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
-->
@Best.Korea
As long as porn is easily available, some children will find it and be harmed by it.
But should they be banned for adults? Maybe not. Are you really advocating to outright ban all porn just because children "might" access it?

Oh that is easy, just make it less accessible, like if you require a secret key to access it(and only download it locally). If a child can somehow access it, maybe watching inappropriate videos is not the largest of the concerns. It is just porn site companies don't care about children accessing it as long as those sweet clicks run money to the voluptuous women they invest in as well as them themselves coming from everyone without discrimination. If they really care about internet safety more than their right pocket, they could just down the whole platform.

The problem is, well clearly, that porn companies care about revenue more than internet safety, not that porn exists. As long as sexual urges are still a thing within human society, porn will persist. Prostitutes are one of the oldest professions in human society, and there is a reason for that.

Topic's author
#3
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,640
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Intelligence_06
If a child can somehow access it, maybe watching inappropriate videos is not the largest of the concerns.
As long as we have a conclusion that porn harms children, then children who are having access to porn would be harmed.
It is irrelevant if one harm is largest or smallest of concerns. Being harmed by multiple things increases harm.
If being harmed by multiple things increases harm, then it is irrelevant if one harm is largest or smallest of concerns.
Children who see porn would be harmed by it. Porn should be banned to prevent such harm. If children who see porn would be harmed by it, then porn should be banned to prevent such harm.
If it is false that no child would be harmed by porn being legal, then porn should be banned. It is false that no child would be harmed by porn being legal. Porn should be banned.


But should they be banned for adults? Maybe not. Are you really advocating to outright ban all porn just because children "might" access it?
As long as porn is available to adults, it would be available to children as well.


Oh that is easy, just make it less accessible, like if you require a secret key to access it(and only download it locally). 
Sure, that could work sometimes, except children could still see it by accident. For example, an 18 year old thinks its funny to show porn to 14 year old bro. Or adult accidentally leaving the porn tab open.


As long as sexual urges are still a thing within human society, porn will persist.
This does not make porn impossible to ban. Some countries have already banned it. Porn plays no role in society. It only causes harm to children.

So if porn brings sexual pleasure to adults and causes harm to children, the only way to be against the ban of porn would be to assume that its okay for adults to harm children for sexual pleasure. I dont think thats the position anyone wants to hold.


#4
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,603
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Best.Korea

OMG, how is any potential Republican First Lady going to make any money?
Published in a men’s magazine over in France, Melania is depicted canoodling with another woman. Both seem to be completely naked.
#5
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
If "harms children" is the only necessary and sufficient standard on which to base a government proscription, then it follows that many things should be banned:

P1) If exposing children to guns harms children, then children shouldnt be exposed to guns.
P2) Exposing children to guns harms children
C) Children shouldnt be exposed to guns

P1) If guns being available for sale harms children, then all guns should be banned
P2) Guns being available for sale harms children
C) All guns should be banned

We know that children sometimes find guns at a very young age.

P1) If the only way to reduce the exposure of children to guns to the minimum is to ban all guns, then all guns should be banned.
P2) The only way to reduce the exposure of children to guns to the minimum is to ban all guns
C) All guns should be banned

As long as guns are easily available, some children will find it and be harmed by it.

So basically, the only way for you to argue against this is to say that something that harms children should be allowed due to your pleasure lmao



Topic's author
#6
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,640
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@oromagi
We are talking about porn here. Stick to the topic. If you want to debate about guns, make topic related to that lmao

#7
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@oromagi
This is sad. He would ban candy and children would hav to eat vegetable.   
#8
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
We are talking about porn here. Stick to the topic. If you want to debate about guns, make topic related to that lmao
He stuck to your argument, virgin child. He directly addressed the frame of your argument so you could see it's weakness. 

Perhaps you could also support your premises by proving harm. 

But even if harm is proven your premises are already disproven as you would most likely not ban guns, candy or tickles In That special spot  from your uncle. 
Topic's author
#9
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,640
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ponikshiy
you would most likely not ban guns, candy or tickles In That special spot  from your uncle
So your argument is an assumption and a personal attack. Great.


#10
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
One of your premises is

If porn being available on internet harms children, then all porn should be banned
Now, if you can swap porn for another word that also works, then using all of those arguments should be true.. 

If alternative arguments are untrue than you argument is false.

Maybe work on premise. 

Maybe start new thread with new premise.

Maybe something like

P1: the sexual innocence of children should be protected

P2: access to porn harms the sexual innocence of children

C1- access to porn should be eliminated by all means possible. 

I would say the argument is still wrong, because it allows Gove to do anything in the name of stopping porn, but maybe you can refine argument to be something like "all reasonable actions" and then defend the actions you suggest is reasonable

However, most everybody agrees  that reasonable actions to prevent harm to a child's sexual innocence should be taken. So you need to argue what actions are reasonable to be useful
Topic's author
#11
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,640
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ponikshiy
Sorry, you are not making any sense. Besides, I dont feel like trolling right now, so I will not be responding to you for some time.
#12
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
Great other guy agree wi4h me. So is you wrong or whole earth is wrong?
#13
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@ponikshiy
-->
@<<<oromagi>>>
This is sad. He would ban candy and children would hav to eat vegetable.   
  • Many children are harmed by water each year.  All water must be banned.

#14
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@oromagi
I forget, some vegetable contaminated so even vegetable not safe. Candy and vegetable ban. Children must drink from mothers tit until they are adult
#15
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,999
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@Best.Korea
to assume that its okay for adults to harm children for sexual pleasure. I dont think thats the position anyone wants to hold.
Don't you hold that position?
#16
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,999
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@oromagi
I agree with your main point, but I think there are better examples than water and guns. Water is a need, and most people supporting the legality of guns would say that guns are a necessity for adequate self-defense. I don't think anyone defending porn thinks that it's necessary for survival.
Topic's author
#17
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,640
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Savant
I can have multiple contradicting opinions. Ability of mine, I guess.
#18
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Savant
My point had nothing to do with guns or water.  My point was that BK'a zealous reasoning did not weight values or impacts.  HIs argument is only that anything that harms children is justifiably banned, ignoring the fact that we knowingly risk harms to humans, including children, in exchange for any of our liberties.  Children are harmed by telling them that Santa Claus is real but that does not justifiy banning Santa Claus from society.
Topic's author
#19
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,640
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@oromagi
knowingly risk harms to humans, including children, in exchange for any of our liberties
Ok, so you agree that its okay to harm children for your pleasure lmao

Topic's author
#20
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,640
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
I rest my case.

#21
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
Ok, so you agree that its okay to harm children for your pleasure lmao
  • and you're such a concrete thinker that you can't perceive any nuance of position between "ought not be banned" and "okay to harm."  Frankly, I'm skeptical there's that much harm in kids seeing porn.  I think back on human history and reflect that most human families throughout history have slept together in a single big room- caves, tents, tepees, little clay or  stone houses, little two-room apartments.  Until the 20th century these families were much larger while losing a lot more kids- commonly the oldest children were grown and married themselves before the youngest child was born.  That tells me that it is probably pretty normal for kids to witness a certain furtive amount of  adults having sex and this may even be an important part of the process of growing up and understanding sex.   Seems like most resonant coming-of-age movies feature some scene of sex witnessed. 
  •  I also think there's a certain amount of dark fantasy in porn that I can't imagine would be helpful or healthy for young minds to experience, perhaps much of that dark fantasy is still perceivable in non-porn expressions....I don't know.  I think the line between art and porn is too fuzzy to get away with banning porn.
  • Much great art was called pornographic in moment of creation, after all.  So- do you forbid your kids from watching porn and work hard to keep them from exposure?  Yes, that seems prudent.  But  if you want curtail a whole selection of free expression to avoid some harm, the onus is on you to show that harm is sufficeintly greivous to suffer the cultural loss, a burden that I've never seen persuasively argued.

#22
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,999
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@oromagi
it is probably pretty normal for kids to witness a certain furtive amount of  adults having sex and this may even be an important part of the process of growing up
As much as I hate to say something good about a political party, I'm with the Republicans on this one. I don't think young children watching adults have sex is an important part of their development; in fact, it probably risks a whole host of psychological problems.
#23
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,351
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
If the government made an internet service free,
But required users have ID cards and Card readers, So user data is filtered,
The government could legalwork 'their internet all they want.
. .

I don't really know how the internet works.
. .

But if individual porn exists,
People are always able to create groups and share.

Even before the internet, porn existed.

@NoOneInParticular
Are two computers hooked together, an internet?
#24
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Savant
I'm with the Republicans on this one.
  • You think the Republican Party is anti-porn?  The leader of the party is so crazy about porn that he paid tens of thousands of dollars to fuck pornstars and then hunreds of thousands of dollars to make them deny it.  The leader of the radical wing, Matt Gaetz bragged about fucking a famous porn-star when she was 17 on the floor of Congress, with a nude picture of her in hand. The Republicans are the porn star fan-boys- they go to all the conventions.

#25
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,999
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@oromagi
You think the Republican Party is anti-porn?
Sometimes I support what politicians say in theory, even if they're reluctant to practice what they preach. Which is often, I'll admit.
#26
Devis4657
Devis4657's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7
0
0
0
Devis4657's avatar
Devis4657
0
0
0
I think porn should be outright banned across the board. 

Definitions: 
porn: television programs, magazines, books, etc. that are regarded as emphasizing the sensuous or sensationalaspects of a nonsexual subject and stimulating a compulsive interest in their audience.

Now the subject brought up is the precious children…I could not find an unbiased source for children viewing porn at what age. On statista, pew research, etc. I did find many that swing both ways from as low was 64% of children had seen pornographic material to 90%+. Depending who is trying to sell you what. 
I tend to be in the 90%+ crowd only because of the prevalence of sexuality in the culture. Children have access at an unprecedented level. They don’t need to see out hardcore porn sites. They can just go to YouTube. 100% of rap/hip hop/ r&B is sexually oriented. Most other categories have some to large degrees of this in their content. 

Now search through videos. How many women or men are scantily clad? Quite a few. Remember the definition. Porn is anything that would not ordinarily be seen in a sexy light (video, book, tic toc, tweet, whatever.). 

You can make the argument of a certain amount of normalization but even that makes no sense. If a member of the opposite gender walks 100 yards in front of you on the beach scantily clad. You are going to notice. Any average member of the opposite sex will peak sexual interest if healthy and fit. Now the caveat is action. Do you have enough attraction to consider for more than a millisecond? Approach? Entice? Copulate? Each level requires more effort. Now this scenario is for the general average/above average healthy- fit male/female. When you add in obesity and other abnormalities it doesn’t work. But that’s the point those are outside the norm.  

The point being you still noticed the other sex. Sized them up sexually. Either a yes or no. But you did. 

Your family is different. Unless your from Alabama😂(joke), sexual relationships with relatives are abhorrent.  You cannot make the case of sleeping in a room with mother or cousin or dad, etc. why because on a societal level you have agreed that is wrong. There is no such standard anywhere else. 

Now back to porn. My dad had a saying…. 99% of men watch porn. The other 1% are damn filthy liars….. and the trend grows amoung women as well. Look at the marriage an divorce rates. Amount of singles per country. The services that cater to singles. 

Next I go into nofap. 

1. Those are some crazy dudes who got excuses.

2. It’s not all bro science.  When you masturbate it is known that your body is flooded with a cocktail of hormones. For both men and women. Excessive amounts of these hormones leads to……singleness in essence. Lessening of the traits of the given sex. Through sheer bombing of hormonal fatigue. 


#27
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,169
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@oromagi
That tells me that it is probably pretty normal for kids to witness a certain furtive amount of  adults having sex and this may even be an important part of the process of growing up and understanding sex.
You're almost certainly correct about children being more exposed to sex in the past and at a younger age. Specifically sex and not porn, it's very easy to get porn today but it can only be seen as return to an earlier mode of child-development.

Yet when I point out cave paintings of bestiality I have found plenty to volunteer the point "Just because that's the way cavemen rolled doesn't mean we should go back to it".

Normalcy in nature or history is no guarantee of superiority or acceptability. It only rules out hypothesized origins of a phenomenon. Certainly the kids won't melt after seeing porn. They'll still grow up, be productive, have families; but maybe they'll be a lot more casual about sex. Maybe that was a detriment in early civilization but is a net benefit now that we have contraceptives?

I don't know. It could be debated, but these are not trivial matters. I distrust flippant attitudes on it.


  • Matt Gaetz bragged about fucking a famous porn-star when she was 17 on the floor of Congress, with a nude picture of her in hand. The Republicans are the porn star fan-boys- they go to all the conventions.
Don't suppose there is video of this?


#28
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
With regards to the penis vagina thing,

We are a crazy mixed up species.

We started to overthink procreation a long time ago and we're still doing it.

Sex and the achievement of procreational satisfaction became a recreational pursuit,

Which in line with economic strategy became a profitable business opportunity,

Just like the development of ball games for example.


Trouble is, in terms of the social acceptability of recreational sex, we are still in limbo-land.

Taboo or not taboo that is the question.


Porn is just education, and in real terms no more or less harmful than Maths.

"Harm" is the view of those who still inhabit the more taboo and inhibited areas of limbo-land.

And to be honest, porn is just a repetitive variation on a theme and over exposure is just as  likely to lead to disinterest in the medium.

Topic's author
#29
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,640
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@oromagi
Look, if you are going to deny that it is harmful for children to watch porn, fine.

But remember, there are only two positions you can have:

1) Porn results in nothing good, but it harms children
2) Porn results in nothing good, but it doesnt harm children

"Porn results in nothing good" is a truism. There is no useful role that porn plays in society.
#30
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Best.Korea
porn plays a lot of useful roles in society. Even the left-wing liberals are speaking against it these days.

Porn is a fantastic thing for single people who aren't getting laid to use to aid their orgasms.