Azərbaycan dili Bahasa Indonesia Bosanski Català Čeština Dansk Deutsch Eesti English Español Français Galego Hrvatski Italiano Latviešu Lietuvių Magyar Malti Mакедонски Nederlands Norsk Polski Português Português BR Românã Slovenčina Srpski Suomi Svenska Tiếng Việt Türkçe Ελληνικά Български Русский Українська Հայերեն ქართული ენა 中文
Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
 Topic closed!!!

Subject: »NEWS AROUND THE WORLD

2014-12-05 10:25:10
LOL, communist UK decided what kind of sex is good for people :-DDD
This is really ill, it is same as we had in Slovakia too under USSR regtime :-), same style.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/a-long-list-of-sex-acts-just-got-banned-in-uk-porn-9897174.html
2014-12-05 10:25:33
next law will be about ban for sex on the table :-DDD
2014-12-05 16:57:33
Will you miss sado-mazo porn? :) Don't worry, the producers will just move to another country, so there will still be enough of those on the internet, if you want! :D
2014-12-05 20:11:09
can british people do it at home :-D ?
what can british people watch in tv and what can not, is there some complete list :-DD ?
2014-12-05 20:12:19
Yatsenyuk had to speak RUSSIAN in ukrainian parliament cos new government members (foreigners) can not speak ukrainian, just russian.... is not it funny :-DD ?
2014-12-05 23:54:05
That seems to be a logical reasoning, but I doubt the logic behind it. The basic value of such a logic is that 'if you don't like it, move to another country'. I question the morality of such a thought. One could defend all possible policies using that logic: If you don't like the Nazis, leave Nazi-Germany. If you don't like communism, leave the Soviet Union. If you don't like Orbán, leave Hungary.

It's like those who say: 'if you don't like the government policies (I heavily oppose my Dutch government), change it from within'. Well, if you don't like the mob, try to change it from within! ;-)

So you can say that with a smile, but in my opinion, the core of that reasoning is morally wrong.
2014-12-06 10:39:54
If state starts saying us what can people watch in tv, or what producers can do or not it can easily go further so producers can be banned once day for shooting in the movie, TV stations can be ban for broadcasting news about rebellions against governments and so....

but it is true, that if is the society so ill and immoral that can not change this huge immorality among inhabitants, there is the only one way how protect them, by state bans. God bless slovakia that we dont have such a problems with so huge immorality like in UK.
2014-12-06 11:28:04
Why should the state decide what is moral and what is not? I think going to Catholic churches is morally more wrong than the things the British government has forbidden. Does that mean that if a majority would agree with me, we would be (morally) allowed to ban the Catholic Church?

Just like you cannot borrow yourself out of debt, you cannot ban people into moral behavior.
2014-12-06 11:48:51
If you don't like Orbán, leave Hungary.

Yes, I don't like him, but I won't leave Hungary, for now. So believe me, I can understand that. I was just kidding with that "logic", that's why the smilies, you know. :)

But to be serious, in this case, I don't think, that it's about freedom of speech vs some conservative morality, as the article tries to falsely imply. It's rather adout exploitation and slavery. It's ok, what sado-masochists do, if it's consensual. It's a little bit (but not exactly) like homosexuality, they are just different, then what's considered normal by society.

But you can bet that in these movies, many times it's not consensual what they do, they just force the victim to sign the contract. Many times, the humiliated ones aren't only slaves in the movie, they're slaves IRL too. Lots of women from the poorest strata of Central and Eastern Europe are taken to the West to be used as slaves. Their passports, and personal documents are taken away, sometimes the maffia threatens their, and their families lives, if they don't act, like everything is consensual. From Hungary, the biggest destinations of slave-trading are Italy, UK and the Netherlands, I think. So it should be stopped, because it's really one of the ugliest things in Europe.

However, this act is misplaced, because the problem is mostly with prostitution, porn movies are just a small segment, and porn-slaves can be easily taken to other countries. So this won't save too many lives. But it's easier to ban porn production, than to fight prostitution and maffia. So I think, the main goal is good, but as usual, politicians chose the easiest way, which doesn't have to be efficient at all. It's enough, if it can be brought up to their voters, who will probably like it.

By the way, if a British wants to watch BDSM, he still doesn't have to leave the UK. :)
2014-12-06 11:55:44
the oldest of the 3 belgian queens passed away last night.
I was hoping we would have 4 at some point, would be a record I think (ignore 2nd marriages) :p
2014-12-06 11:57:58
If state starts saying us what can people watch in tv, or what producers can do or not it can easily go further so producers can be banned once day for shooting in the movie, TV stations can be ban for broadcasting news about rebellions against governments and so....

Us?? What us? You are not even British, so there is no 'us'!

And what about RT, is also state tv. No comment about that? Ofcourse not!

And what about politics against independent media??

http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/12/media/cnn-russia-broadcasts/

You are so damn predictable, sickening!
2014-12-06 23:09:57
Yes, slavery must be dealt with. But banning certain porn movies is not going to help that.

But the Slovakian guy was talking about the fact that the government should impose moral laws. That's ridiculous. It's the equivalence of borrowing yourself out of debt.
2014-12-07 00:15:19
I agree that it doesn't help much, I just wrote that. What I'm disagreeing with is degrading this question to freedom of speech vs religious morality.

For example you could argue, that pedophilia is banned, because of some stupid morality, and government interferes with people's private rights. But it isn't banned, because of moral reasons, it's simply banned, because you cannot make pedophile sex without harrassing children.

This case is different, of course. There is consensual bdsm sex between adults, but it would be quite naive to believe that all (or even most) of the mazochist models are really mazochist in the movies, and they aren't forced by any means. And for now, it's impossible to make a distinction, because the paperwork is correctly done, in every case.

But I agree, that governments should rather concentrate on hunting down the mafia, instead of banning things. On the other hand, maybe people should be more aware of slavery. If it wouldn't be the first and only reaction, that people blame religious morality in questions like this, maybe governments would be urged to do something, that's actually useful.
2014-12-07 00:29:27
This case is different, of course. There is consensual bdsm sex between adults, but it would be quite naive to believe that all (or even most) of the mazochist models are really mazochist in the movies, and they aren't forced by any means. And for now, it's impossible to make a distinction, because the paperwork is correctly done, in every case.

And because a part of those models is indeed enslaved, because you cannot make the distinction, it should be forbidden? That's not proportionate. It's like forbidding sex because rape exists. One should ban the abuse, not the act itself. Merely the fact that abuse exists, can never be a legitimate basis to forbid something.

I'm not saying everything in that business is done according to the will of all parties involved. I'm not naive. I'm just not willing to continue this war on liberty. (Because that is the fundamental core of our Western 'social' democracy: a war on all civil liberties.)

And the fact that one cannot make that distinction because the paperwork is correctly done, only shows how inefficient our laws and bureaucracy are to tackle the real problems.

But I agree, that governments should rather concentrate on hunting down the mafia, instead of banning things. On the other hand, maybe people should be more aware of slavery. If it wouldn't be the first and only reaction, that people blame religious morality in questions like this, maybe governments would be urged to do something, that's actually useful.

The government should not be saying what we should be aware of or not. The government must guarantee freedom and tackle the real criminals (those who do not respect other people's liberty), both in the public as in the private sector. The government is just like the maffia. The only difference is the claimed democratic legitimacy.

Morality and law must be strictly kept apart.
2014-12-07 00:55:36
And the fact that one cannot make that distinction because the paperwork is correctly done, only shows how inefficient our laws and bureaucracy are to tackle the real problems.

You see? That's the real problem, not morality.

It's like forbidding sex because rape exists.

Or it's like banning weapons, because crime exists. Most people, who would buy weapons wouldn't want to use it on others, or threaten people with it. Still they can't have most weapons, because of some criminals.

The government should not be saying what we should be aware of or not.

Well, it's not true in this form, unless you want anarchy. But then why would you want criminals to be tackled? :D However, in this case nobody said, that you should be aware of anything, it's 100% your choice, whether you tolerate slavery or not.
2014-12-07 01:05:08
You seem to assume that I agree with the fact that it is forbidden to have most weapons. I oppose that. It is stupid to forbid weapons. The only result of that is that only two categories have weapons: cops and criminals. Not a good idea.

I want criminals to be tackled because criminals violate other people's right on liberty. I do not consider drug dealers or weapon smugglers to be criminals because of their profession. They might be, but not because of their profession.