We should argue, and quarrel if we must, about how right wing Christians (cultural conservatives if you will) became one of the most influential power blocks in US electoral politics.
We should also discuss why that is a bad thing, as it threatens the existence of secular democracy--the best form of government humans have yet devised and put into practice.
Originally posted by WulebgrDiscussing American politics is equally as outdone as discussing religion.
We should argue, and quarrel if we must, about how right wing Christians (cultural conservatives if you will) became one of the most influential power blocks in US electoral politics.
We should also discuss why that is a bad thing, as it threatens the existence of secular democracy--the best form of government humans have yet devised and put into practice.
Let's discuss something a little less ethnocentric.
Perhaps pornography and its effect on the sexual education and expectations of teenagers; or let's discuss the inherent impact globalisation will have on developing third world countries. I haven't seen those topics debated upon since I've been around (longer than three weeks).
Originally posted by darvlay1. Agreed. My point is that if we must continue to discuss religion and American politics, lets look at their convergence and its significance.
Discussing American politics is equally as outdone as discussing religion.
Let's discuss something a little less ethnocentric.
Perhaps pornography and its effect on the sexual education and expectations of teenagers; or let's discuss the inherent impact globalisation will have on developing third world countries. I haven't seen those topics debated upon since I've been around (longer than three weeks).
2. Anything less ethnocentric would be welcome.
3. I'm not an expert on pornography, but I welcome your willingness to share your experinces.
4. If you haven't seen a debate on globalization and the third world, you're not following all the threads. The most vigorous debate I've found in these forums--and though I've only been here for three weeks, I scanned most of those back to September--has taken place on this very issue over the past several days.
Originally posted by WulebgrPlease refer me to the thread, I would be very interested in reading it.
If you haven't seen a debate on globalization and the third world, you're not following all the threads. The most vigorous debate I've found in these forums--and though I've only been here for three weeks, I scanned most of those back to September--has taken place on this very issue over the past several days.
Where are my forty names?
[4. If you haven't seen a debate on globalization and the third world, you're not following all the threads. The most vigorous debate I've found in these forums--and though I've only been here for three weeks, I scanned most of those back to September--has taken place on this very issue over the past several days.][/b]For those of us who've come to the party late , can you give us the forum thread titles you would find most germain to this discussion ?
Originally posted by darvlayPlease don't assume you know what I can imagine.
believe me, this is a more serious issue than you may imagine.
Why should I believe you? What do you know? You want the thread, start it.
The dangers of pornography are one of the few topics that left-wing feminists and right-wing Christians can find common ground. It is interesting how they both oppose free speech to achieve a greater good.
Originally posted by Wulebgr
Please don't assume you know what I can imagine.
Calm down, baby girl. I said "than you may imagine". I was not assuming anything.
Why should I believe you? What do you know?
You're ranting and making little sense now. Would you care for a picture of me to punch?
You want the thread, start it.
I believe I'll do just that. Thank you for your advice.
Originally posted by Wulebgr
Please don't assume you know what I can imagine.
Originally posted by darvlay
Calm down, baby girl. I said "than you may imagine". I was not assuming anything.
Foolish effort at insult aside, nice cover! I stand corrected.
Originally posted by Wulebgr
Why should I believe you? What do you know?
Originally posted by darvlay
You're ranting and making little sense now. Would you care for a picture of me to punch?
I like the picture you have, and have no reason to throw punches. I prefer to hurl words.
Originally posted by Wulebgr
You want the thread, start it.
Originally posted by darvlay
I believe I'll do just that. Thank you for your advice.
You are welcome.
I might admit that not everything you have posted here is the "same thing." Start that new thread, now, it may prove interesting.
The dangers of pornography are one of the few topics that left-wing feminists and right-wing Christians can find common ground. It is interesting how they both oppose free speech to achieve a greater good.[/b]Are you saying it is okay to abridge or limit pornography for the greater good of society or are we to allow a free and open epxression no matter what the content?
Originally posted by Mangy MoooseNo. I'm simply registering my observation that feminists--Catherine MacKinnon, for example--and right-wing evangelicals--James Dobson, for example--have advocated the supression of free speech in order to limit what they view as the horrors of pornography. So far, I am withholding my own opinion on this matter.
Are you saying it is okay to abridge or limit pornography for the greater good of society or are we to allow a free and open epxression no matter what the content?
I was also agreeing with darvlay that a thread on this topic might be a little more illuminating than some of the other more active ones.
Originally posted by Wulebgrnoted:
No. I'm simply registering my observation that feminists--Catherine MacKinnon, for example--and right-wing evangelicals--James Dobson, for example--have advocated the supression of free speech in order to limit what they view as the horrors of pornography. So far, I am withholding my own opinion on this matter.
I was also agreeing with darvlay that a thread on this topic might be a little more illuminating than some of the other more active ones.
Catherine MacKinnon + James Dobson = strange bedfellows
The thing that is the prerequisite for this conversation , and makes the over all social debate so difficult : Define pornography . I haven't yet seen an agreed upon definition here or out in the world . Some would define a dress with a hem line above the knee as pornographic , others draw the line at more than one head of livestock involved . Society can't agree on this , I doubt we can , so how do we have a debate about it ?
Obscenity was defined in 1964 by Justice Potter Stewart:
"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that." JACOBELLIS v. OHIO, 378 U.S. 184 (1964)