Unspeakable filth on the internet

@odenskrigare,

odenskrigare;83050 wrote:

Same difference tbh

You're missing the point, I think Theages was saying that people are too prudish where I disagree, thank you.

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

ah k I see now and need to type at least 16 characters

0 Replies

@William,

William;82834 wrote:

Speaking on behalf of Alan, of which I do not have his permission, don't you think it a matter of courtesy to offer an explaination to your "unfounded", hit and run accusation"? Wouldn't it be a friendly thing for you to perhaps offer any knowledge as to just how he, Alan, could take those precautions that would prevent that from happening, if there are indeed any, any young mind couldn't crack. We would all like to know such information, if it exists. It would be the "polite" thing to do, don't you think?

William

My explanation is that there are all kinds of programs that will filter out that kind of thing. I don't even know what browser he is using. But I am pretty sure it has such a program. And he should not have let the kid go unprotected. It was irresponsible.

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

No most browsers do not have morality-wise content filtering built right in, get real

1 Reply

@odenskrigare,

odenskrigare;83069 wrote:

No most browsers do not have morality-wise content filtering built right in, get real

Many do. I think Firefox does. AOL certainly does. And I have a feeling there is one in Windows. Anyway, he should have made it his business to find one. The internet is an open sewer.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;83071 wrote:

Many do. I think Firefox does.

Maybe you can download one but it's not part of the default build

kennethamy;83071 wrote:

AOL certainly does

AOL sucks

kennethamy;83071 wrote:

And I have a feeling there is one in Windows

No

kennethamy;83071 wrote:

Anyway, he should have made it his business to find one. The internet is an open sewer

I have seen few vile things on the Internet I wasn't looking for

0 Replies

@Theages,

Theages;83040 wrote:

Your desire to no feel ooked out by stuff that you see online does not trump the rights of others to look at or produce what they want. Keep your puritanism to yourselves.

Ah, what a profound argument. Whose rights? The rights of an adult, or the rights of a child whom these sights exploit? Might I ask how many children you have? :letme-at-em:

William

1 Reply

@Alan McDougall,

First Amendment > your squeamishness

0 Replies

@William,

William;83078 wrote:

Ah, what a profound argument. Whose rights? The rights of an adult, or the rights of a child whom these sights exploit? Might I ask how many children you have? :letme-at-em:

William

You believe that nothing should be on the internet not fit for the eyes of a child? How about books? The child's rights have not been exploited. Lately, a small child in my town was hit, and killed by a car. The child had been permitted to wander about without supervision in heavily trafficked streets. The driver of the car was not charged. But there are charges pending against the negligent parents. Do you think that drivers were violating the rights of the child to walk where the child pleases? Think a little harder.

2 Replies

@kennethamy,

Caroline;83056 wrote:

You're missing the point, I think Theages was saying that people are too prudish where I disagree, thank you.

I don't care what you think qualifies as prudish. Your opinion has no bearing on what I can or cannot look at or produce. Keep it to yourself.

William;83078 wrote:

Ah, what a profound argument. Whose rights? The rights of an adult, or the rights of a child whom these sights exploit? Might I ask how many children you have? :letme-at-em:

Oh please, won't someone think of the children?! :sarcastic:

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

Do you have a firewall? Like ZoneAlarm? Nine out of ten times this sort of autopsy-porn crap will get blocked by it.

P.S. Some time ago one of the forums I was posting on became inundated with autopsy-porn (the filth of the interwebz). When this happened, and it became clear the forum's admins were not updating the server's firewalls to stop it from happening again and again, the mods created their own forum which eventually supplanted and killed the earlier forum.

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;83082 wrote:

You believe that nothing should be on the internet not fit for the eyes of a child? How about books? The child's rights have not been exploited. Lately, a small child in my town was hit, and killed by a car. The child had been permitted to wander about without supervision in heavily trafficked streets. The driver of the car was not charged. But there are charges pending against the negligent parents. Do you think that drivers were violating the rights of the child to walk where the child pleases? Think a little harder.

Sorry, Ken! Nice shot, but no cigar. What do you suggest? Lock the child in the attic, home school him, keep his friends away, throw out your television,(though I think that is an excellant idea), or put him on a short leash? Hell, what are we talking about? After all it's money that makes the world go around, and since we legalize porn, people are making a fortune on kids; porns greatest commodity. Thank you, Larry Flynt; a man of great insight? Damn!!!!!

William

2 Replies

@William,

William;83091 wrote:

Sorry, Ken! Nice shot, but no cigar. What do you suggest? Lock the child in the attic, home school him, keep his friends away, throw out your television,(though I think that is an excellant idea), or put him on a short leash? Hell, what are we talking about? After all it's money that makes the world go around, and since we legalize porn, people are making a fortune on kids; porns greatest commodity. Thank you, Larry Flynt; a man of great insight? Damn!!!!!

William

More supervision so that he isn't permitted to roam heavily trafficked streets; or, more supervision so that he isn't permitted to surf the internet without the protection of filters.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;83101 wrote:

More supervision so that he isn't permitted to roam heavily trafficked streets; or, more supervision so that he isn't permitted to surf the internet without the protection of filters.

Thanks Ken, I understand what you are saying. But, damn! What supervision? Most parents, if the child is lucky enough to have a Mother and a Father are busting their ass just trying to make ends meet and keep a roof over their head much less give the attention and supervision a child needs! Most mother's or many, at any rate, thanks to being liberated and all have to work and assume the role of Mother and Father and their just isn't enough time in the day to do that. Pornography wasn't an issue 40 years ago, when it only consisted of a few "men's" magazines tucked away under counters at news stands. Hell, when I was a kid, the only "boobs" we were exposed to was in "National Geographic" magazine.

I get caution all the time because I am of the "old school" when there was no such thing as metal detectors and drug tests and kids carrying guns to school that has lead to such incidents as Columbine. I could tie so many loose ends together here, but it would just piss a lot of people off simply because they don't know any better in this god forsaken politically correct society we have created where anything goes. So, I guess I have better end it here before I get another "red badge of courage" for getting a little ticked off at another members, IMO, lame, politically correct rationalization for abortion. If the "new school" sees nothing wrong with pornography as one member call those who see the tragedy of it, a puritan, then I thank god I am of the "old school". There was "a sense of morality" then, which has gone with the "politically correct" wind. God help us!

William

1 Reply

@William,

I'm not entirely clear on the connection between seeing boobs and mass murder

I mean in hunter-gatherer societies where people don't wear much clothing and you see boobs hanging out all the time there isn't much mass murder afaik

Are you making things up, William, or is this just an honest, albeit deluded post hoc ergo propter hoc argument

1 Reply

@odenskrigare,

odenskrigare;83130 wrote:

I'm not entirely clear on the connection between seeing boobs and mass murder

I mean in hunter-gatherer societies where people don't wear much clothing and you see boobs hanging out all the time there isn't much mass murder afaik

Are you making things up, William, or is this just an honest, albeit deluded post hoc ergo propter hoc argument

You not old enough to understand it. So let's just leave it at that.

william

2 Replies

@William,

William;83136 wrote:

You not old enough to understand it. So let's just leave it at that.

william

No, William, let's not just leave it at that

You make an absurd claim, I call you out on it, and then you bring the number of trips I have made around the sun into the discussion like that actually means anything

There are plenty of people here in the reality-oriented community who are older than either of us so your age argument doesn't really pass muster does it

0 Replies

@William,

William;83136 wrote:

You not old enough to understand it. So let's just leave it at that.

william

Speaking of ad hominem arguments.....! Aren't you embarrassed?

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

He ought to be

Unfortunately making a whole bunch of trips around the sun does not impart some magical gnosis that us young'ns can't comprehend

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

Absurd? Embarrassed? Not in the least. If I choose to leave it at that, thank you, I will. If it angers you because I will not engage in your attempt to sabotage what I said, then you will just have to deal with it.

william

0 Replies

Unspeakable filth on the internet

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know