DrewDad wrote:
David's newly-revealed fascination with child porn is surprisingly unsurprising.
I have always been interested in how people think,
particularly those with whom I cannot agree
;
how radically
DIFFERENT their thought processes are than mine.
I remember once, many years ago, I sent out a process server
to subpoena a kid to testify in personal injury litigation.
(My investigator had reported that the kid had witnessed
the accident involved and had rendered an account at the scene,
and on the police report, that was favorable to exculpation of my client,
but my investigator reported that the kid's parents did not want him to testify.)
One of my partners did not like my doing so, and argued against it.
To me, this was
incomprehensible.
Finally, after argument, he admitted that he opposed it because
HE was a father
and he 'd not like it if someone subpoenaed
HIS daughter to testify
against his will;
UNPROFESSIONAL.
I did not give a rat 's ass about the witness' parents
; thay were not my clients.
I cared about winning for
MY client, and
MY contingent fee.
Tho my partner voted in November the same way that I do,
his mental processes were singularly
ALIEN to mine, on this point.
Before he admitted the reason that he disliked my having subpoenaed
the child, I felt like I wanted to unscrew the top of his head and look down
to see what was going on inside.
Similarly, it struck me as
odd, or strange,
that u wud all get so emotionally incensed against Agrote.
U sounded like u all wanted to
lynch him; but for
WHAT ?
He did not
DO anything.
He merely raised an issue for discussion on a forum.
Its
not as if Agrote had announced plans to go into the child porn business next week
with intentions of taking pictures of rapes going on; that did
NOT happen.
To my mind,
it seems a little weird that anyone wud choose to become infuriated about
someone taking another person 's picture
; if u add to that the element
that the model is unclothed (but consents to the photography),
I still see no logical reason that anyone can have to object.
So far as I understand, this is not a matter of discussing
the propriety of rape,
any more than it is of
the propriety of murder; both are criminal matters for the police.
On the contrary,
Agrote has raised questions concerning the ethics of photography
and what u think about those ethics.
Raising questions for discussion is a perfectly innocent thing to do.
In response to Agrote's doing that, u repeatedly
INSULTED him
and (figuratively speaking) ground his face into the earth.
From my (incomplete) reading of these threads,
it appears that many of u were sadistic in your efforts to humiliate Agrote
and he did his best to use logic to defend himself
and to continue his inquiry.
If honor and decency are to be served,
you will all apologize to Agrote.
Will u have the maturity and honor to do so ? We shall see.
These threads have been explorations
into the relationship between emotions and photography,
or
perhaps more broadly into the relationship between emotions and art.
I 'm not inquiring into pornography
; I am inquiring into
WHAT u all
THINK about it, and how the law shud apply to it
and
how your thought process operate.
In order to
LEARN,
I must probe the minds of people who
DISAGREE with me, to get new information.
THAT is the subject matter of this inquiry, not pornography.
David
