Christmas 'pornaments' cause a stir

[moklet]

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=29&art_id=qw1165596840390B226

The selling of sexually explicit tree ornaments called "Pornaments" at a chain of novelty stores across Florida has led a Miami lawyer to ask stores to stop sales, or else face legal action.

The nine ornaments - spoofs portraying Mr and Mrs North Pole, reindeer and Frosty the Snowman in sexually risque positions - are selling for nine dollars and are on display on public shelves.

Store officials say that there are no restrictions on selling them publicly, which has caused some citizens to be outraged that children can see them.

"I have sent a letter to the merchant telling them exactly what Florida statute they have violated," says Jack Thompson, the Miami lawyer who filed the protest.

Florida laws prohibit the display of material which is "harmful" to minors in open display, or within the reach of minors who may frequent the retail establishment.

However, a Jacksonville, Florida store official who asked not to be identified said that very few children come into the store because it features mostly adult novelty items as it targets 18- to 25-year-olds.

That response has not stopped a youth group from a local church from protesting outside the store located in one of the city's largest malls. They have sang songs and chanted, asking store officials to remove the ornaments.

"We want to save our generation from Pornaments," several of the groups members chanted.

There have been reports that the Pornaments have sold out in other outlets throughout the United States.

A TV report posted on the Internet said that three of the seven Florida stores have pulled the product from their shelves. - Sapa-AFP

 

[supersunbird]

Obviously if this church youth group knows what pornaments are, its already too late and they were corrupted to know what porn was before these things even were on the shelf...

 

[redarrow]

Obviously if this church youth group knows what pornaments are, its already too late and they were corrupted to know what porn was before these things even were on the shelf...

I'm sorry, but that's just silly their problem is obviously not about knowing what porn is.. but with having to see it...

 

[supersunbird]

So they go into stores that are adult orientated so that they can see these things and know its there? Mmmmm...

 

[Nod]

Thats like going to watch a strip show, and then complain about indecency, or walk into a sex shop and complain about the sexual theme of the place. Religious people will find something to complain about everywhere they go. If you look for something to complain about, you will.

Why don't they protest about the wars their government starts, or smoking / drinking or gambling? These things are more decremental to society than a few "action" figures.

 

[redarrow]

They are protesting to something they find objectionable in their city... this is what loyal citzens do.

Just because you don't have a problem with it or at least don't think it should be a priority doesn't mean you are right.

Personally I think porn is way way more decremental to society than smoking - but I wouldn't go around pointing at people calling for smoking bans and telling them to prioritise - unless I actively believed smoking to be good for society..

rationale: Unless you think porn is doing society good then what precisely is the problem with people protesting against it?

 

[Nanfeishen]

People have a RIGHT to veiw porn, and people have a RIGHT to complain about it, it is called freedom of choice, BUT, when one group wants to enforce laws or regulations preventing the other from their RIGHT, that is called dictatorship, and enforced cencorship and repression.
Everybody has the RIGHT to decide what they want to see and what they dont, and nobody has the RIGHT to inflict their moral standards on anybody else.

 

[Nod]

They are protesting to something they find objectionable in their city... this is what loyal citzens do.

So because a small group of people find it offensive, they can dictate to the rest how they should feel, and cause shops to close their doors?

 

[redarrow]

So because a small group of people find it offensive, they can dictate to the rest how they should feel, and cause shops to close their doors?

You can look at like that if you want, but you're just bluffing yourself.

They cannot dictate how the rest should feel/act etc. anymore than the anti smoking activists can. They can complain, and that's what they are doing...

The principal of a "democracy" is majority rule? - not so? In this case it's impossible for a "small group" (as you called them) to dictate to the majority.. if they manage to get their way then it must be in fact the wants of the majority.. Unless it's not a "true" democracy.

Everybody has the RIGHT to decide what they want to see and what they dont, and nobody has the RIGHT to inflict their moral standards on anybody else.

Yet even you will define exceptions to this rule when it satisfies you. What makes murder/theft/other crime officially a "crime"? It's merely somebodys "moral standard".. What if I decided it didn't fall into my moral standard? Can you then force it upon me?

 

[Nanfeishen]

Murder , theft , rape etc are crimes in the sense of society , these are laws that hold a society together, they are natural laws of being "civilised" or of living in a "civilised" society, and of maintaining said society as a whole.
I put "civilised" in in such a way because i do not believe we are truly civilised as a species.
Personally i do not set or define to my definitions, i feel that people can do what they want whenever they want , however they want, as long as it does not directly harm in a PHYSICAL way any other human, animal or living being on this planet, nor does it change the existence of any other human, animal or living being.
If your personal system of morals is intact, and you feel secure in your life that the morals you choose in life are the one's you truly believe in and wish to follow, then follow them to your hearts content, but do not judge another if his morals differ in ways that are offensive to you, know that his morals are different that is all.
So porn and sex shops and sexually graphic material do not harm you, nor does it alter your existance, it simply offends you, or not.

 

[redarrow]

Porn can effectively physically affect someone, perhaps just not in quite such a direct visible manner. I can easily argue that porn (and everything that goes with it) feeds the "appetite" of rapists rather than teaching them to curb it.. in this way it can easily be the cause of increase in said crime.

It's basically about perception.. we only protest about what we percieve to be harmful to us and/or others... but who's perception is the correct one?

 

[Nanfeishen]

Studies done before legalisation of porn in countries such as Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Belgium, Japan showed no link between porn and rape, in fact studies showed that by porn being readily available, the education of people with regards sex, was broadened, and that opinions were altered.
As to rape, rape is a power game between rapist and rapee, it is about power , not about sex, it is about degrading and rendering powerless the individual.
Now considering that we are emerging from a patriachal society in South Africa, with women gaining power in leaps and bounds, and especially in the previously disadvantaged communities,which are black by nature, that were originally patriachal based societies, it is a forgone conclusion that men are going to feel powerless, specially the traditionalists within those communities. So what do you get? a rise in rapes! Power struggle!
The problem within this country, is that the tribal system of hierachy is collapsing too quick , and hence the structure which controlled those societies is collapsing.
Affecting somebody , or creating a physical response in somebody is not harming them when the affect is a natural bodily function
Perception can and is altered by progressive thinking, not by having a blinkered approach to what you dont agree with.

 

[redarrow]

Affecting somebody , or creating a physical response in somebody is not harming them when the affect is a natural bodily function

Like death? Death is probably the most natural bodily function, one that every living being must experience... So I can kill without causing unatural bodily functions..

Perception can and is altered by progressive thinking, not by having a blinkered approach to what you dont agree with.

Yea.. but that's just your perception
Who was it who said that if you open your mind too much your brains wil fall out?

Point at the end of the day is: I do not believe that viewing porn has absolutely no effect on someone which could possibly later effect others..

If you had a young child and you had (for some weird reason) to leave her in the care of a choice of one of two complete strangers, neither has a criminal record but one of them is known to frequently view porn... are you telling me that that would have no effect on your choice because studies have shown that he's just as "safe" ?? Not for me.

 

[Nod]

If you had a young child and you had (for some weird reason) to leave her in the care of a choice of one of two complete strangers, neither has a criminal record but one of them is known to frequently view porn... are you telling me that that would have no effect on your choice because studies have shown that he's just as "safe" ?? Not for me.

People shouldn't leave their children with strangers, thats just plain stupid, so it's not a real probable scenario.

The point is, that everybody have a certain freedom, and with freedom comes responsibility. A responsibility too respect other peoples freedoms. If a job owner wants to sell 'pornaments' because of a market, he should be allowed to do it. If the society where his shop is located, does not support him, he will stop selling it.

Peoples sense of morals and values is as different as night and day. What is acceptable to me might be offending to you. But because we have freedom, you have the freedom to not have anything to do with it, and to also accept that as long as I don't force my moral values down you throat, I have the same freedom.

So, to come back to your child with stranger "idea". If both strangers respect me, and the way I rise my child, they will both look after the child.

People will try to change other people, that is fact of live. If you don't fit in with what other people deem normal, you are labeled weird, or even worse victimized to a point where there is no option but to leave that society.

People should realize that in the bigger picture, their voice is but a small whisper.

 

[nthdimension]

I can easily argue that porn (and everything that goes with it) feeds the "appetite" of rapists rather than teaching them to curb it.. in this way it can easily be the cause of increase in said crime.

You could, but you'd be talking out of your ass.

 

[nthdimension]

If you had a young child and you had (for some weird reason) to leave her in the care of a choice of one of two complete strangers, neither has a criminal record but one of them is known to frequently view porn... are you telling me that that would have no effect on your choice because studies have shown that he's just as "safe" ?? Not for me.

Oh the horror. They might even be people who have sex. It's too sick to contemplate.