BOO to the US Supreme Court!

[Susan]

We're waaay off topic.
The Danielle case is not the only one that can be attributed to h****i. Also, there are many cases of rape, addiction, and murder that can be directly connected to h****i.
Not to mention that it has led to a large increase in divorce and child abuse.

 

[AlphaPhi]

You cannot prove that any form of animation causes those things, Susan. The best you could show is that people who are likely to abuse their children are also likely to watch hwhateveri. That proves merely correlation, not causation.

 

[Susan]

Yes, but would it not be logical to assume that if someone is already "unbalanced" or "perverted," that watching h****i would be like adding fuel to the flame? You yourself said something to that effect.
H****i does no good for society. The only benefit it produces is a financial one for its producers-at the cost of innocent persons.
Even if it "only added fuel to the flame," do we need it around when it can be taken away? Sure, we can't rid the nation of all things that might make someone go berserk. However removing one thing would be better than doing nothing.

 

[PrinceJeff]

*yawn*

 

[AlphaPhi]

Originally posted by Susan
Yes, but would it not be logical to assume that if someone is already "unbalanced" or "perverted," that watching h****i would be like adding fuel to the flame? You yourself said something to that effect.

And some stupid kid could see Tom & Jerry hit each other with hammers and go hit his brother and kill him. Is that the fault of the cartoon? NO!

People are responsible, fully, for their actions. No movie, book or cartoon can influence a person to do something evil if they weren't headed in that direction already.

H****i does no good for society.

In your opinion. Some well adjusted, normal people may find it enjoyable to watch. You have no right to tell them "you can't watch this because *I* don't like it."

The only benefit it produces is a financial one for its producers-at the cost of innocent persons.

Again, you cannot show conclusive causation.

Even if it "only added fuel to the flame," do we need it around when it can be taken away?

Yes. Because the potential of something to do harm in a small minority of cases is not justification for a ban. Once you start banning things because they might be watched some nutjob loser who does something bad, you open the door to bar all sorts of things.

"Well, gee, that kid put a cape on his shoulders and jumped off that tree and killed himself!" Ban comic books!

"Hey look, those kids were playing Orcs and Hobbits and that kid clubbed that other kid with a stick..." Ban Lord of the Rings!

"Hey, that guy was a rabid, frothing fundie 'christian'
and just went and shot up an abortion clinic." Ban the Bible!

However, removing one thing would be better than doing nothing. [/B]

No, it would be creating a precedent for other religious or social nutcases to force the elimination of entertainment they think is "bad."

Who are you to determine what I can and cannot watch?

We've seen in post after post that you hate Asian culture, since it comes from a religious milieu than your so-called form of Christianity. So frankly, I think this is just another chance for you to attack people who are different than you, and has nothing to do wtih "pertectin' da children."

 

[Susan]

No! I do not hate Asian culture. I dislike Shintoism, Buddhism, and fleshly sins. Those are noticable parts of, but are NOT the whole of Asian culture. Shintoism, Buddhism, and the sins of the flesh are constraints that bind people from knowing the truth of Christ and from living a life that pleases Him.
And I see that you have resorted to ad hominem attacks now. Please refrain from attacking me personally, as that is aginst the rules.

 

[PrinceJeff]

One more crude remark by ANYONE and this thread will be trashed.

 

[Susan]

You might as well close this thread anyway, as it has wandered far from its original purpose and served another.
I wanted it to be a place to provide information for those who opposed and wanted to recriminalize h****i. Instead it became an often rancorous debate.
I will start a new thread with the beginning post of this one slightly altered.

 

[Susan]

Eeeek, this is one old thread. . .

I'm still anti-hentai, but I don't believe the Supreme Court is the place to take the issue, LOL.

Please just let this thread die. I don't even know why it was dragged up again. . .

 

[Jet Black]

The problem I see, is that no-one gets hurt in the production of hentai, so what is the actual problem with it? you can argue tht it corrupts, but that is a problem with the person, and not the media, and it is the person that is the problem.

 

[Susan]

Wow, let's PLEASE let this thread die, OK?

I find hentai personally distasteful, and I don't like having it shoved in my face when I open my e-mail box or look for something that isn't hentai.

Basically, I'm against hentai, but if its fans kept it amongst themselves, I wouldn't really care much because it would be their sin and their problem, not mine and not that of anyone else who doesn't like the slop.

However, when I run into it on any anime-related search, when I get spammed for it if I'm the least bit careless with my e-mail or IM name, when there's posts on boards and come-ons on websites that are ostensibly unrelated to H, then I'm a little annoyed.

By the way, I had heard one of my friends insisting that an anime I like was hentai because of some hentai fanart, even though the anime itself wasn't hentai.

Will a mod please close this thread? I really don't want to start this war again, and I don't know why it was even posted in again. . .

 

[Susan]

oops, double post

 

[Jet Black]

Wow, let's PLEASE let this thread die, OK?

I find hentai personally distasteful, and I don't like having it shoved in my face when I open my e-mail box or look for something that isn't hentai.

well you don't have to atke part if you don't like it. your argument there consists of two independent points 1) that you don't like it and 2)that you don't like it being shoved in your face.

well 1) isn't an adequate reason for the courts to ban it. I don't like Friends, but do I expect the courts to ban it? no. 2) however is illegal already, and nothing to do with the problem adressed by the courts.

incidentally I am also an anime fan and don't like hentai and get irritated by the immediate association between this and decent stuff. however I see no reason for hentai to be banned unless it hurts anyone, which it doesn't.

that is all I really have to say on this.

 

[Susan]

That's all I have to say too, and you made some really good points. . .except that I believe hentai does hurt people on occasion (like a divorce that is caused because of it, or someone who decides to act it out)

Anyway, on that point, let's agree to disagree, and on the rest of your post here, I actually am quite close to agreeing with you.

 

[Jet Black]

again, that is the people. there have probably been divorces because of the bible because someone gets so obsessed with it, or divorces over computers for the same reason. the problem there is obsession, which is alwas bad imo. also people who blur fiction and reality.

as I said, hentai sucks, but I don't see a reason to ban it. maybe I should look harder, but I really need to be able to justify something before I have an opinion like that.

 

[HazyRigby]

IMHO... There is no doubt that any media containing any illicit sex or extreme sexual views is bad for society in general.

Can you prove this?

It exploits women and children and is an evil, evil thing.

I'm a woman, and I'm not being exploited by porn. In fact, how does it exploit anyone? The actors get paid. How does it exploit children, for goodness' sake? I don't know what pornography store you're shopping at, but I've never seen even ONE child in any pornographic movie. Ever.

 

[Jet Black]

I'm a woman, and I'm not being exploited by porn. In fact, how does it exploit anyone? The actors get paid.

one could argue that it exploits the people weak enough to rely on such a thing.

however McDonalds also exploits the weak too.

 

[HazyRigby]

one could argue that it exploits the people weak enough to rely on such a thing.

You mean like any other job that isn't fun to do, but in which one likes the money?

I can think of much more demeaning things to do for my money...like, say, cleaning public toilets. Or mopping up vomit and pee in a retirement home. And so on.