Poll: UK ban on Extreme pornography

[fnph]

I'm concerned that people are actually saying this law's alright because they're not into that kind of thing.
The government shouldn't be censoring people's freedom to enoy what they enjoy, even if it does cause them physical pain. As long as all parties are conseting then it's fine.
Although, as far as the beastiality stuff goes, that should probably banned, seeing as how animals can't consent.

 

[KendayTheAbsolute]

i said/voted no, because i think people can do anything they want with there personnal lives.

I say yes because I think people have a right to do what they want with their personal lives. As long as I do not have to see it.

just don't go to the strange websites.

Hehe, wish that was a viable argument. I think you are right but anyone else it seems they forget that if you don't like it, don't turn it on.

true... I think

 

[NekoAnastasia]

I dont support this shit but I will defend there right to watch it. because then they dont go out and try to make there own with people/animals who probably won't give consent to that.

Actually, it can be argued that this stuff causes more of this type of thing. Young minds are easily warped.

People like what they like. Fetishes are considered diagnosable mental conditions, and without a safe outlet for them, people can go to dangerous extremes.

Beastiality and necrophilia is already illegal because corpses and animals are unable to give consent. The new addition to the law refers to humans, the injury/death parts.

If everyone in the video has given their informed consent, what right has anyone to tell them they can't do it, if that's what floats their boat?

No one ever considers what it's like for a person with a fetish. This is an extremely unpopular viewpoint, but imagine someone who has a fetish for something which is illegal. A fetish is a mental condition, it's something you can ignore but it doesn't stop you from being attracted to that, possibly feeling incomplete and unsatisfied otherwise. If that person is unable - and usually unwilling - to do the illegal act because they know it's illegal, but they still desperately want to, why shouldn't they be allowed some harmless fantasy in pornography? Providing everyone involved consented, it shouldn't be anyone's business or right to deprive someone of that.

 

[zacaron]

I am also interested in how they are going to go about enforcing this law if it was passed.
just go door to door with a warrent for a serch of your house?

 

[Alphavillain]

As long as its consensual, then fine. But animals and kids...no, no, no.

 

[sirdanrhodes]

It's only a matter of time until the UK becomes AK - Austrlianesk Kingdom.

 

[samsprinkle]

That's...disturbing to say the least...I do it with dead bodies all the time and no one says anything to me...Necrophilia, lay back and crack open a cold one...

 

[Slayer_2]

I voted yes. But I'm not British and on second thought, even though I couldn't care less about this law if it were implemented in Canada, I'm sure some... people... might not like it. The only problem I have with it is Britains government seems to be getting out of control. I'm glad Canada hasn't leapt on the censorship train yet. And as for Fetishes, they rank up there with ADD in my mind. They are just a state of mind, you can change it, blaming it on a disease or fetish doesn't help any.

 

[NekoAnastasia]

It didn't say for definite that it would make the problem worse, I just said it could. On the one hand, as you say, depriving someone of a legal outlet of their fantasies could be dangerous but at the same time other people may gain these kind of fantasies by watching these things when their mind isn't ready to handle it (not all people are born with mental conditions, some gain them later on). It's a matter of which situation would result in the greatest illegal activity, which is a question I really wouldn't be able to give a justifiable answer to, having not seen any reports or statistics on the matter. It would be an interesting (if a bit morbid) subject to do some research on though.

Aye, I agree that it may spark curiosity, but I do feel that there's a difference between a real fetish and someone being interested in something. Maybe the industry shouldn't churn this stuff out to lower the risk of influencing people, but why should it extend to couples filming their own stuff for personal use?

This law doesn't change that doing those things in reality is illegal, anyway. Making it illegal to look at them is like trying to make it illegal to even think about them (doubleplus bad), which they haven't figured out how to do, yet.

By this logic, perhaps we should ban all films in which people kill one another or drive over the speed limit. Those things are illegal and it may encourage more people to do it. What about Grand Theft Auto? We're giving people a taste of carjacking, murder, speeding etc. Does that make people want to do it, or provide them with a vicarious way of getting their thrill so they don't have to?

 

[MagnetoHydroDynamics]

Ban = increased activity.
That is a fact.
Prooved by:
Christianity
Alcohol
Pornography
Drugs
Weapon possesion (Not in the states)
etc.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

UK government becomes more and more authoritarian by the day. We are the only "free" nation with no right of silence when arrested, no right to talk to legal representative when arrested, no right to trial by jury. You can be held for a month, without charge, without your family even being told where you are and what you are being held for. The entire country is wired with cameras watching your every move, they are trying to pass laws to get every single man, woman, and childs DNA and finger-prints on a database.

Now this.

Welcome to Alcatraz.

 

[anti_strunt]

Since no form of bestiality can ever be properly "consensual", that stuff should definitely be banned, at least.

 

[anti_strunt]

Ban = increased activity.
That is a fact.
Prooved by:
Christianity

Wait, they banned Christianity?

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

So the entire Saw Films, Fear and Loathing, Naked Lunch, A Zed and Two Noughts, Nightmare on Elm Street, Hellraiser, The Watchmen, The Accused, Ringu, Flowers in the Attic, Brazil, Twin Peaks, Last Temptation, Conan The Barbarian, Family Guy and many others will be banned? I think not.

 

[mosinmatt]

Safe under the watchful eyes.

 

[NekoAnastasia]

So the entire Saw Films, Fear and Loathing, Naked Lunch, A Zed and Two Noughts, Nightmare on Elm Street, Hellraiser, The Watchmen, The Accused, Ringu, Flowers in the Attic, Brazil, Twin Peaks, Last Temptation, Conan The Barbarian, Family Guy and many others will be banned? I think not.

No, apparently it's totally fine if you have a budget of millions and then put your extreme work out there in cinemas, online and on DVD for everyone to watch and little kids to watch late on Channel 4. It's if you're an isolated, consenting couple recording scenes that you'll never show to anyone else, that you clearly need to be thrown in jail. >_>

@Zhoom
Yes, I don't think anyone's desputing that as beastiality and necrophilia are illegal, anyway. The bit people are up in arms about is the part that refers to people. As animals and corpses cannot give informed consent, it stands to reason it shouldn't be legal, but anything involving consenting adults should.

Anyone into "the scene" knows the scope of the things some people are into. Whilst I, personally, may find some completely disturbing, I wouldn't dream of taking away someone's right to enjoy them, painting them as morally corrupt for doing so, or telling them they shouldn't even look at it, providing the whole informed consent thing is there. That really should be the bottom line, otherwise it's just none of anyone else's business.

 

[Wislong]

They way I live my Life is that:
People can do whatever they want, so long as no one get hurts.


So, so long as it's not hurting anyone...