🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <404jsd$3...@news.xs4all.nl>, Jojo <jo...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>waw...@sun23.cs.wisc.edu (Joel Wawrzon) writes:
>
>>Hah!  Now that's a retort that I only wish I had come up with.  I think
>>that brilliant little piece of prose pretty much clears up any ambiguity
>>on the differences between sex and pornography.
>
>On the contrary, it was a stupid answer. Pornography is not different 
>from sex. Pornography is part of sex as we know it. Some don't like the 
>pornography side, some do.
>
>> Jojo is Dutch, so we can understand and forgive his confusion <G>.
>
>I'm proud of *not* being an American like you Joel. You "decide" on 
>what's good and bad for other people.  I am not much interested in porn,
>but if other people are (and some of my friends really are) then I think 
>that's ok. They don't harm anyone, so if they are enjoying themselves, 
>who are *you* to decide that they are doing something wrong, huh?
>Is your second name Jezus, perhaps?  If you happen to be a Christian: 
>It's in the bible that God forbids people to decide on good or bad, while 
>saying that it's "God's wish". 

Actually, it doesn't. 
But to correct your error before this one, your friends have every right to 
purchase a pornographic magazine. But I have every right to purchase a 
computer game magazine that has _no_ lewd photos in it.

Now back to your confusion about the Bible:
It never says, _anywhere_, that people are forbidden to decide on good or bad.
I really think you should read something before offering a review of it's 
contents.
After all, if you had never, ever cracked open a copy of CGW, would you be 
able to make an educated statement regarding it's contents?


 But of course, as an average American you 
>ignore logic and you just copy the public opinion, and keep telling how 

Isn't that what you just did regarding the Bible?


>other people should behave. (And keep thinking that the US does so much 

YOU are telling HIM how to behave. You are telling him that he needs to accept 
nudity and partial nudity everywhere his eyes should fall. This is a violation 
of his rights as a citizen of this country. He has the right _NOT_ to be 
exposed to such things.


>better than people from other countries. Well, you're wrong.) Be proud of it.
>
>>As for censorship:  no one is suggesting that anything be censored.  It's
>>simply a matter of the publishers taking responsibility for their content.
>>The porno ads are pretty low-class and out of place in a magazine with a
>>reputation like CGW.  The publishers should have more taste and common sense
>>than this.
>
>There is no "low-class" tag. The problem is in *your* mind. At least 
>*try* to find a bit of logic in your reasoning. You're way off.

"Call 1-900-hot-babes. I want to talk to you _now_ *sigh, sigh, moan, pout*"

Oh, you are _so_ right. Those kinds of as are so tasteful and high class!

>
>>I suppose it's up to us and the companies that advertise in CGW
>>(like C Systems) to let them know that we dissaprove.  If they don't get the
>>point, then they don't get the money.  Simple.  No big brother anywhere.
>
>Well, you just lost me as a potential customer with such an attitude. 
>Let's hope more people will follow.
>
>BTW, from the pornography that I've seen in my life, I think 98% came 
>from the US, 1% from France and 1% from Germany. I've never seen Dutch 
>pornography. Makes you wonder why.

Eurpean nations account for 72-75% of the worlds porn industry each year.

>
>Jurgen.
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert v Luthardt jr*luth...@clark.net*http://www.clark.net/pub/luthardt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation
has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more
efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
-Adolf Hitler,passing of the German Weapons Act, 1935.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------