Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sanctus)
    Don't be too quick to shed your tears - you could become the king of soft boy-girl porn. :cool:
    Soft porn? God! What's the point in that? :rolleyes:
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shaft)
    Don't they wear protection :eek: ... imagine if you found out you were conceived during the making of a porn video *shudders*

    Nah- most of them have had their vas deferens cut.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AM1)
    Like drugs, pornography can be very addictive and damaging. Furthermore, pornography can be an agent of marital breakdown, where one member becomes "hooked". Many of the "actors/actresses" become involved in the industry because of exploitation, and many get STDs.

    Do you agree?
    In my oppinion No it shouldn't be banned as I don't think that it is doing any particular harm. It can be used as an aid in couples as well as alone and I don't think that is wronge. It can be a agent in marital break down but is in my view more likely to be the effect of other deeper underlying problems in the relationship. I do however think that more money should go into regulating the industry to minimise exploitation.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Even if it could be proven that pornography is 'bad' per se, why would we want to ban it, are we going to start banning everything that some half-baked governmental report has decided doesn't have a positive benefit on us? Sounds like the beginnings of fascism!
    + as i said before banning something when there is a demand for it only encourages a black market so long live porn!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheWolf)
    + as i said before banning something when there is a demand for it only encourages a black market so long live porn!
    Yeah he's right. They really shouldn't ban stuff like pot and porn, why not just legalise it, slap a high pigouvian tax on it and hey presto, gordon'll have enough tax revenue to make a little dent in that government debt.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think in some situations it can be damaging as it often gives men (who are the primary users) an unrealistic idea of what sex is like, and what women are like and what they want.
    One example of how porn can be very unrealisting and potentially cause a lot of problems is the depiction of rape in these films. I read a statistic that around 75% of rape in porn films show the woman enjoying it. This is obviously not the case in real life.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mysticmin)
    Yeah he's right. They really shouldn't ban stuff like pot and porn, why not just legalise it, slap a high pigouvian tax on it and hey presto, gordon'll have enough tax revenue to make a little dent in that government debt.
    lol how do you put tax on pot though, most pot origins are illegal
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheWolf)
    lol how do you put tax on pot though, most pot origins are illegal
    Promote the legalised product first, tax free, from all good government stores, free with every maternity hamper. Then after 3 years, when the users are hooked, charge them tax for it. Like cigarettes really.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    Promote the legalised product first, tax free, from all good government stores, free with every maternity hamper. Then after 3 years, when the users are hooked, charge them tax for it. Like cigarettes really.
    I didn't think it was that easy to get addicted to cannabis though... You'd have to smoke it for a fair while first... Longer than 3 years surely?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fleff)
    I didn't think it was that easy to get addicted to cannabis though... You'd have to smoke it for a fair while first... Longer than 3 years surely?

    depends what type you toke and how often
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    Promote the legalised product first, tax free, from all good government stores, free with every maternity hamper. Then after 3 years, when the users are hooked, charge them tax for it. Like cigarettes really.
    lol imagine the society getting doped, im sure the govt wouldnt do that
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheWolf)
    lol imagine the society getting doped, im sure the govt wouldnt do that
    negative psychology?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by riffraff)
    depends what type you toke and how often
    So the suggestion was to provide extra strong marijuana to all? hmmmm... I can see it now... hash cakes it schools.....
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by riffraff)
    negative psychology?
    how would negative pyschology work here? :confused:

    (Original post by Mysticmin)
    Yeah he's right. They really shouldn't ban stuff like pot and porn, why not just legalise it, slap a high pigouvian tax on it and hey presto, gordon'll have enough tax revenue to make a little dent in that government debt.
    That's the kind of thing I would expect from a budding economist like yourself - unlike economists, us philosophers have humanity, not money, at heart

    Just kidding!

    But on a more serious note, I don’t think that the state should associate itself with such activities by making laws saying that they're permissible. I think that the state should be silent on the issue of pot n porn - i.e. neither make it illegal nor legal - but it should legislate against harder drugs and child porn.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fleff)
    I didn't think it was that easy to get addicted to cannabis though... You'd have to smoke it for a fair while first... Longer than 3 years surely?
    Flesh the product with nicotine.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    Flesh the product with nicotine.
    Ahhhhhh... that would work... But then the money gained from getting everyone addicted would have to be put into the NHS because of the health risks of both nicotine and cannabis... I think I'm reading too far into this...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fleff)
    Ahhhhhh... that would work... But then the money gained from getting everyone addicted would have to be put into the NHS because of the health risks of both nicotine and cannabis... I think I'm reading too far into this...
    lol ofcourse the govt would never do this, the negative multiplier effect is massive by make pot available to everyone and lowering the price...gosh
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheWolf)
    lol ofcourse the govt would never do this, the negative multiplier effect is massive by make pot available to everyone and lowering the price...gosh
    WOW, look whose the one doing some prior preparation...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sanctus)
    That's the kind of thing I would expect from a budding economist like yourself - unlike economists, us philosophers have humanity, not money, at heart

    Just kidding!

    But on a more serious note, I don’t think that the state should associate itself with such activities by making laws saying that they're permissible. I think that the state should be silent on the issue of pot n porn - i.e. neither make it illegal nor legal - but it should legislate against harder drugs and child porn.
    I am a budding economist no more I'm a budding engineer
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.