[OT] Re: UVLUG presents Pete Ashdown on Open Source, politics andgovernment *PLUS* an installfest!
jcoates at archive.org
Wed Feb 22 18:33:06 MST 2006
>Claims made by people with a grudge...based entirely on emotion,
>religious beliefs, etc, rather than on facts and logic.
(un)fortunately, we live in a day and age where access to information is
such that no one has a good excuse not to have their facts straight - or if
not facts, then well thought out reason.
so far you've based your arguments on:
-your personal experience with porn
-your first hand knowledge of families that have used porn (which you at
least admit isn't very useful data)
-you spent 5 minutes googling and found some links about the industry that a
bunch of other people link to
-and your opinion that you think society is "just fine".
so, yeah - i'd say that you could use a little a bit more facts and some
logic to go with those emotional claims. ;-)
like i said before, if you're going to make a pro-porn argument, at least do
your homework first. it's nothing personal - but i just think it's
important to get your facts straight before you bloviate. (hey - that
oh, and i apologize for calling charles a predictable ass. that wasn't very
nice of me. :-/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: plug-bounces at plug.org [mailto:plug-bounces at plug.org] On
> Behalf Of Josh Hansen
> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 5:32 PM
> To: Provo Linux Users Group Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [OT] Re: UVLUG presents Pete Ashdown on Open
> Source, politics andgovernment *PLUS* an installfest!
> Grant Robinson wrote:
> > On Feb 22, 2006, at 4:06 PM, Josh Hansen wrote:
> > <snip>
> >>I wasn't trying to make a pro-porn argument,
> > Interesting. So saying that it's a big industry, society is
> > functioning fine with it, etc., are not arguments saying
> that porn is
> > OK?
> Ok, fine, it was a pro-porn argument then.
> > So, if I said that lots of people get abortions and it
> doesn't seem to
> > harm the mother or society, would you say I was pro-life or
> I would say you were pro-life if you felt that abortion
> should be illegal, and pro-choice if you felt that women
> should be allowed to choose. Since I don't think porn should
> be illegal, I suppose I must be pro-porn.
> >> I was trying to argue that
> >>basing your vote on a candidate's stance on pornography
> doesn't make a
> >>lot of sense,
> > Sure it does. People can base their vote on whatever they
> would like,
> > be it the War in Iraq, social security, Homeland security,
> tax reform,
> > etc, etc.
> You can base your vote on whatever you want, sure, but that
> doesn't mean that it makes sense.
> >>and I also added my opinion that porn is not harmful to society,
> > But you're not pro-porn?
> I guess I am.
> >>without adding a lot of hard facts and statistics because I assumed
> >>that nobody would care.
> > If you are going to state an opinion that runs counter to
> what other
> > people have expressed, hard facts and statistics go a long
> way towards
> > proving that you may actually have a case.
> Forgive me for assuming that everyone else here had seen
> figures on the size of the porn industry at some point in their lives.
> >> If you want to read past the first few lines of my
> original post and
> >>discuss the rest of it with me, please do, but any more of these
> >>pointless spams from you will simply get you added to my blacklist.
> > That _would_ be a shame. :)
> >>Anyway, I rarely read slashdot, but from statistics I am
> finding now
> >>(on a lot of sites, but mainly from the same two sources,
> http://www.familysafemedia.com/pornography_statistics.html, porn
> >>is a 57 billion dollar industry worldwide, and 12 billion
> in the US,
> >>which is larger than the combined revenue of all professional
> >>football, baseball and basketball franchises, and the
> combined revenue
> >>of ABC, CBS, and NBC.
> > So just because an industry is big and brings in a lot of
> money, it is
> > a good industry? Is Microsoft a 'good' company just
> because they have
> > a large market share? What about Enron? They were the
> darling of the
> > energy industry? Were they a good company? The oil
> industry is way
> > larger than porn. Chevron alone brought in over 100
> Billion dollars
> > last year. Is the oil industry a good industry? Is the
> OPEC cartel a
> > good organization? I believe that we should probably base
> whether an
> > industry or company is good or bad, good for society or harmful to
> > society, on more than market cap or revenue. I am not necessarily
> > saying that any of these companies are good or bad, just
> that success
> > and making money don't really correlate with how _harmful_ that
> > business or industry is towards society or individuals.
> > BTW, I would check some facts before using those as a basis for
> > argument, as in 2005 NBC Universal brought in 3.1 billion
> all on it's
> > own, and the one website you quoted claimed the revenue for
> all 3 was
> > only 6 billion. The website you pulled that info from provided no
> > information as to where _any_ of these stats came from.
> My point there was that with as large as the porn industry
> is, and with the amount of people who indulge in pornography
> out there, it can't be as harmful to society as Richard
> Miller believes it is, because the vast majority of society
> functions just fine. I wasn't exactly saying that porn is
> good just because it's popular.
> As for the figures I stated, I searched Google for a few
> minutes, and almost every page I found with statistics about
> the size of the porn industry cited the two links I provided
> as their own sources. I would definitely love to see some
> more accurate numbers, if there are any.
> >>If such a large industry is so harmful to society, where is all the
> >>harm? I know that some people like to blame rape and other sexual
> >>abuse crimes, the divorce rate, etc on porn, but I don't
> buy that, and
> >>I haven't seen any information to convince me otherwise.
> > You are free to believe whatever you want. I have seen statistics
> > both ways. From the experiences of people I know, I believe that
> > pornography can be _very_ destructive. If you believe otherwise, I
> > would base it on more than just how much money an industry
> rakes in.
> > Tobacco companies make a killing too, but it's an
> undisputed fact that
> > people who smoke are _way_ more likely to develop lung cancer than
> > those who don't. And yet people still buy cigarettes. I
> once saw a
> > guy who had lung cancer and whose lungs barely functioned (he was on
> > oxygen) and could barely walk (he was in a motorized
> scooter) driving
> > down the sidewalk smoking a cigarette with the oxygen tube
> in his nose.
> > Just because people spend money on things does not in any
> way mean
> > that those things can't, won't, or don't harm them.
> > Grant
> My own anecdotal experience would indicate to me that porn is
> not destructive at all, because almost everyone that I know
> and spend time with on a daily basis looks at pornography at
> least on occasion, whether it's the DVD here and there, a
> collection of magazines, websites, or links to porn or shock
> pics on IRC. In case you're wondering how I know people look
> at porn, it's not because we all get together and look at it
> together, but because it's easy to gather through
> conversations and other ways when you know someone well. In
> my experience, people who aren't vehemently against porn
> don't worry too much about hiding the fact that they enjoy it
> now and then. But anyway, I have never known about a single
> family destroyed by porn (or even slightly inconvenienced by
> it). I have known of plenty of families torn apart by other
> various things, but not porn. But forget my own experiences,
> they don't matter in an argument anyway. I have read about
> families destroyed by porn in the newspaper, usually it's a
> prominent religious leader or someone like that who everyone
> thought was a good guy, but who got busted with kiddy porn,
> which is illegal already. The fact is, millions of people
> all over the world are into porn, and for the vast majority
> of them, it doesn't cause any problems. It probably does
> contribute to the deterioration of an already unstable
> individual in some cases, but those are exceptions, and we
> don't need new, unenforceable laws to deal with them.
> Basically, I think claims that the porn industry harms
> society are no different than claims that violent videogames
> harm children.
> Claims made by people with a grudge (against porn, or violent
> videogames), based entirely on emotion, religious beliefs,
> etc, rather than on facts and logic.
> PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
> Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
> Don't fear the penguin.
More information about the PLUG