Forum - View topicNEWS: Alaskan Prosecutors Cite Anime in Virtual Child Porn Ban Push
|
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Animehermit
 Posts: 964 Location: The Argama |
|
|||
|
while i do not think loli images and manga are moral, i do concur with the fact that it is just fantasy, and once you start regulating fantasies its a slippery slope from there.
|
||||
|
||||
Mohawk52
 Posts: 8202 Location: England, UK |
|
|||
|
I wonder if any of them have been to Iowa?
 If no one has been prosecuted in Alaska, then what has sparked this judicial review?
|
||||
|
||||
|
Pedestrian A
Posts: 160 Location: Toronto, ON |
|
|||
|
All the fictional characters portrayed in the following anime are over 18 years of age.
|
||||
|
||||
Shiggity
 Posts: 367 Location: Boston, MA |
|
|||
|
It never ceases to amaze me how the media/government misunderstands the purpose of animé and manga. Why can we not enjoy a story with young children (i.e. school girls in sailor fuku) without assuming it's all hentai or ecchi related? I think they really need to study more into it before making assumptions as to what it really is.
And I concur with the "it's just fantasy" post above. |
||||
|
||||
|
Ari-chan
Posts: 215 Location: Florida |
|
|||
I don't think they are misunderstanding that point, at least from how I see it. Sounds like they are only talking about the obscene depiction of sexual activity among children characters, such as actual sex and tentacle rape and what have you. Not regular manga itself. I don't support thought policing, but regulations on obscene material I also don't think is a terrible thing either. Fantasy is one thing, but for some people who may have unstable minds and may have trouble accepting the difference between fantasy and reality, I don't think a firmer grip on the wish fulfillment would be absolutely devastating. Though I do agree if to much regulation goes into it and it becomes though policing then it does become a rather dangerous slippery slope. |
||||
|
||||
|
Shiggity
Posts: 367 Location: Boston, MA |
|
|||
Ahhh... good points. |
||||
|
||||
|
Xacur
Posts: 9 |
|
|||
I don't think anything should be regulated thinking in unestable minds, they should be treated separately. The fact of liking little girls is not something wrong, anyone is in his right, as long as you don't offend anyone or violate someone's right you can do anything you want, that the base of Law, and that's what fantasy is about. That's why violent video games are legal, you mutilate people and enjoy their suffering of a virtual character by chopping his head off, but you wouldn't ever do it in real life, and the common people wont be affected by that, only, as you said, unstable people. That people must be treated and not undermining the rest of the people's rights. That's so easy to understand, you learn that in the first months of tour law career, that's the basis of law, but people in government seems to forget those fundamentals very often. I don't want to offend anyone, but many of these problems are because of the hard influence Christian religions have in USA. With a regular way of thinking all of this would be out of question. |
||||
|
||||
InuNaruPokeAlchemist
 Posts: 415 |
|
|||
It'll take a mirical or some convinceing to our government to understand that Manga is fictional, non of this stuff is real.
I am of the Christain religon, but I still don't find manga as a souce Adlut things (unless aimed at such age groups) Last edited by InuNaruPokeAlchemist on Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:46 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
Seljuk
 Posts: 139 |
|
|||
I'm not too sure what you're saying here. If you are saying what I think you are, I would argue to the opposite point. Some people with 'unstable minds' may only be kept sane through a harmless wish fulfillment outlet such as this. Vague terms like "a firmer grip" will translate to regulation or banning of said material (because let's face it, any involvement in this case wouldn't be some halfway resolution, at least in the USA). Unless you are talking about self-policing, which still in the end comes down to a personal choice. Any regulation on this issue is too much, in my opinion. |
||||
|
||||
John Casey
 Posts: 1853 Location: In My Angry Center |
|
|||
|
Shouldn't them lawyers be busy with other crap? How I recall, there are numerous penguin eating savages all over Alaska!
Prioritize people! PRIORITIZE! First barbarity! THEN virtual child porn or whatever. Last edited by John Casey on Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:58 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
Kougeru
 Posts: 5589 |
|
|||
That video game comparison is the best one I can think of as well. Killing someone is the biggest thing you can do to violate someone's life....and yet it's perfectly fine to "falsely" do it and yet when people have different tastes for things that are also fake it's evil? wth? They're just picking and choosing what they don't agree with. I've said it many many times ..but until I see proof there's any harm done...then it shouldn't be banned. |
||||
|
||||
|
Ari-chan
Posts: 215 Location: Florida |
|
|||
What I'm saying is I don't support a complete ban on all titles that feature sexualized children, but for more extreme titles that feature highly obscure visualizations of child pornography, I don't think the idea of regulating the flow of material is a terrible thing. I would say having a fantasy of something like guro child rape is rather unhealthy to begin with. The obtainment of wish fulfillment doesn't also automatically stop a person from doing it in real life either, so I think it's silly to say that having someone look at it is absolutely harmless. As it stands I've yet to see solid proof that "child porn" doesn't stop people from the attempt, nor have I seen proof for the other side. I think people in the government are looking at it as a more "better safe than sorry" approach, which I'm not complete against at this time. My only concern is the extremity of the ban, which may be for better or for worse as I see it. |
||||
|
||||
Splitter
 Posts: 1276 Location: Knockin' on Heaven's Door |
|
|||
|
First off,
This irks me to no end. Let's ban South Park and Family Guy while we're at it for being naturally conducive to attracting a child!
Now playing devil's advocate here, the only reason this would cross over with religion is because the issue of virtual CP is a moral dilemma for many lawmakers dealing with it. Naturally, when people face a moral dilemma, they turn to the lessons they learned as children regarding morality, often of a religious nature and certainly not of pertaining only to Christians. |
||||
|
||||
|
Kougeru
Posts: 5589 |
|
|||
That's still a huge problem. When they start banning SOME of something they'll start doing the same for other things. and there's no proof that "guro child rape" is unhealthy. That's just your opinion on the matter. Which is the problem. Unlike real child porn which harms people, this ..as it stands..doesn't. Everything should be done based on the FACTS. Morals should mean nothing, especially in a FREE country. Unless there's solid proof that it's harming someone (disagreeing with it is not harm) then it should be 100% legal. |
||||
|
||||
|
vanfokerdumplestein
Posts: 10 |
|
|||
|
No matter how explicit, obscene or grotesque the imagery may be (heck, it could be guro and I still wouldn't care), in the end, they're just nothing but harmless depictions of children. The very notion of regulating them is downright alarming. If this ban does indeed pass, the Supreme Court needs to strike it down immediately, because it could establish a very very dangerous precedent.
I have a virtual buddy who was hesistant to order a Kodomo no Jikan poster through eBay because of fears that he would be prosecuted if the package was intercepted and opened during transit. After reading this, I realize that his paranoia was probably somewhat justified. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group