Be careful about photographing your kids!
Mxsmanic wrote:
Here's what happens when you dare to photograph your own children: http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues...l/1/index.html Yet another argument for digital photography, I guess. Or you should develop your own film. Then again, maybe both of these would be considered "suspicious activities" in themselves. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. Found this from 3 years ago http://www.hotstreak.net/anti/news/mar00/070300b.htm -- Paul. (Love with tongues of fire) -------------------------------------------------------------- Not what it seems... http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/ |
Be careful about photographing your kids!
"Kiddie porn", if it doesn't actually involve real incidents of rape, is
nothing more than lewd photos. As such, it is quite unsurprising to see the moral majority step in and outlaw such victimless crimes. This behaviour fits Texas well, as well as anti-sodomy laws, anti-gay laws, etc. It's not the "kiddie-porn" that sickens me, it's the self-righteous attitude of the "moral majority". .... and the U.S. calls itself a "free" society! "Mxsmanic" wrote Here's what happens when you dare to photograph your own children: http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues...l/1/index.html Yet another argument for digital photography, I guess. Or you should develop your own film. Then again, maybe both of these would be considered "suspicious activities" in themselves. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
Be careful about photographing your kids!
gr writes:
"Kiddie porn", if it doesn't actually involve real incidents of rape, is nothing more than lewd photos. As such, it is quite unsurprising to see the moral majority step in and outlaw such victimless crimes. This behaviour fits Texas well, as well as anti-sodomy laws, anti-gay laws, etc. It's not the "kiddie-porn" that sickens me, it's the self-righteous attitude of the "moral majority". ... and the U.S. calls itself a "free" society! As with homosexuality, the people most paranoid about child pornography and most likely to see it where it doesn't exist are often the same people who secretly lust after such material. What better job for a peodphile, for example, than as a police officer investigating pedophilia? It's the best way to see illegal child pornography with a perfectly legitimate cover. And by prosecuting incidents of innocent nudity, the cover can be maintained and access to the "real thing" maintained as well. I notice that a lot of people who campaign against pornography seem to be a lot more familiar with it than I am, even though I have nothing against pornography. I wonder about people who spend hours and hours salivating over the photos that they claim are evil and indecent. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
Be careful about photographing your kids!
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message snip As with homosexuality, the people most paranoid about child pornography and most likely to see it where it doesn't exist are often the same people who secretly lust after such material. What better job for a peodphile, for example, than as a police officer investigating pedophilia? It's the best way to see illegal child pornography with a perfectly legitimate cover. And by prosecuting incidents of innocent nudity, the cover can be maintained and access to the "real thing" maintained as well. snip Often ? That is getting a little paranoid in it self :-) Its a pitty that you cant even smile at a child in a park and they look at you funny. Having said that, I foudnd it funny today driving along when I saw a fire engine with a sign. "Wanna feel the heat, how about work for the fire brigade" It kind of sounded like "Are you a fire bug, come and see your own fires from close up" Giorgis |
Be careful about photographing your kids!
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 08:42:30 -0400, "gr"
wrote: "Kiddie porn", if it doesn't actually involve real incidents of rape, is nothing more than lewd photos. As such, it is quite unsurprising to see the moral majority step in and outlaw such victimless crimes. This behaviour fits Texas well, as well as anti-sodomy laws, anti-gay laws, etc. It's not the "kiddie-porn" that sickens me, it's the self-righteous attitude of the "moral majority". ... and the U.S. calls itself a "free" society! I'm with ya on this, BUT, imagine this... You take your photos of your 4 year old daughter running naked through the house or rolling around with the puppy. You take the photos in to the local developer where some 19 year old kid is twisted enough to get off on such things. He makes some copies and then scans em up on the net. Now the innocent pictures of your precious little angle are avail abel to millions of pedophiles to wack off to. I'm not trying to **** you off, I just want to point out that these laws are there for a reason. I do not always agree with the way the laws are used or applied such as in this case. -- Like a game of pick up stick played by ****ing lunatics |
Be careful about photographing your kids!
|
Be careful about photographing your kids!
gr wrote:
"Kiddie porn", if it doesn't actually involve real incidents of rape, is nothing more than lewd photos. As such, it is quite unsurprising to see the moral majority step in and outlaw such victimless crimes. This behaviour fits Texas well, as well as anti-sodomy laws, anti-gay laws, etc. It's not the "kiddie-porn" that sickens me, it's the self-righteous attitude of the "moral majority". ... and the U.S. calls itself a "free" society! "Mxsmanic" wrote Here's what happens when you dare to photograph your own children: http://www.dallasobserver.com/issues...l/1/index.html Yet another argument for digital photography, I guess. Or you should develop your own film. Then again, maybe both of these would be considered "suspicious activities" in themselves. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. There are limits, but the current laws in responce to an attitude of hysteria go MUCH too far. The current laws use the word 'provocative'. What may provoke one might be simply 'cute' to another. Somewhere I have an old picture of my niece that is unmistakenly 'provocative', but it is no way lewd, or lacivious, nor does it show anything sexual. Still, were I to dig it out, I wouldn't take it to WalMart for printing. |
Be careful about photographing your kids!
Mxsmanic wrote:
gr writes: "Kiddie porn", if it doesn't actually involve real incidents of rape, is nothing more than lewd photos. As such, it is quite unsurprising to see the moral majority step in and outlaw such victimless crimes. This behaviour fits Texas well, as well as anti-sodomy laws, anti-gay laws, etc. It's not the "kiddie-porn" that sickens me, it's the self-righteous attitude of the "moral majority". ... and the U.S. calls itself a "free" society! As with homosexuality, the people most paranoid about child pornography and most likely to see it where it doesn't exist are often the same people who secretly lust after such material. What better job for a peodphile, for example, than as a police officer investigating pedophilia? It's the best way to see illegal child pornography with a perfectly legitimate cover. And by prosecuting incidents of innocent nudity, the cover can be maintained and access to the "real thing" maintained as well. I notice that a lot of people who campaign against pornography seem to be a lot more familiar with it than I am, even though I have nothing against pornography. I wonder about people who spend hours and hours salivating over the photos that they claim are evil and indecent. No. The ideal job for a pedophile is gymanstics coach. Not only do they get to see children in skimpy, or tight clothes, and watch them move, and pose, and show off, they get PAID to touch. A fox hired to guard a hen house doesn't have it so good. |
Be careful about photographing your kids!
Giorgis wrote:
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message snip As with homosexuality, the people most paranoid about child pornography and most likely to see it where it doesn't exist are often the same people who secretly lust after such material. What better job for a peodphile, for example, than as a police officer investigating pedophilia? It's the best way to see illegal child pornography with a perfectly legitimate cover. And by prosecuting incidents of innocent nudity, the cover can be maintained and access to the "real thing" maintained as well. snip Often ? That is getting a little paranoid in it self :-) Its a pitty that you cant even smile at a child in a park and they look at you funny. Having said that, I foudnd it funny today driving along when I saw a fire engine with a sign. "Wanna feel the heat, how about work for the fire brigade" It kind of sounded like "Are you a fire bug, come and see your own fires from close up" Giorgis It isn't at all uncommon to read of a firefighter arrested for arson. |
Be careful about photographing your kids!
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com