CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Should All Porn (& Nudity) Be Legal To View?
I ask this question because porn is becoming (if not already) main stream, as well as sexting is now common. The age of consent varies across the states from 15 to 18 in the U.S., and throughout the world the ages are even lower/higher. What this means is video/pics of what is a legal act, is getting people charged with a crime. Now, I'm not advocating for abusing animals or children, I'm simply saying, sex that is legal should never be illegal to video, take pics of, or watch. Countries that have legalized all porn, have actually had a drop in underage abuse/rape (contrary to what many thought would happen). Also, we are charging too many teens with illegal porn for consensual sexting (these are the very same teens we were suppose to be "protecting"). These laws have been used to charge teens taking pics of themselves wearing pajamas, others have been charged for pics of "legal" sex, this isn't protecting teens. So we have two choices, legalize it or recognize we are putting around half of our teens in danger of being charged with a serious crime (because they take pics or videos of themselves).
Ahh yes, the never ending question, "where is your proof"? Well, rather than respond to each and every request for proof, here is a link discussing how legalizing the viewing of all porn actually lowered abuse/rape (let's be honest, to some people all the proof in the world won't change their mind):
Note: I noticed a lot of comments are off topic, please stay on topic and if you really want to talk about incest (or other off topic issues) start another debate of your own (it's easy to do, just click new debate)
Did you not know that in many countries in the world, including most African nations, as soon as females mature they are married and are giving birth in their early teens.
Whilst I'm not advocating this lifestyle I at least recognize that millions of people have the right to live their lives within the accepted norms of the society in which they live and we have no right to sit in our Ivory Towers and judge them or try to impose our moralistic standards.
Did you not know that God will bring you into judgement for everything you have ever said, done, imagined every place you have ever been in every moment of the time He gives you?
...Oh, this is the pervert's corner excusing or condoning porn. Let's just say you're perverted and I'm glad I didn't read your post past the first few words.
That question is regarding viewing, rather than making any kind of porn video. This question is aimed at viewing, which is a separate issue... and you forgot to include grandma too in your response.
Yes, put your mother, sister/sisters, aunt/aunts, daughter/daughters all in a porn video for the world to watch...and you can watch with them, and then tell me how porn is ok......and put your grandma in there too, and I suggest using life term prisoners in the video as well, or whatever dirty dog men you can find who want to be perverts with your mother, sister, daughter, your dog too you pervert.
"Porn is sick", you have every right to your point of view. No one is suggesting you have to watch porn, but you have no right to force other people to go without porn. The most searched term in the U.S. is teen, incest porn is also gaining popularity, and while you may not like either; other people do!
Those people, and only those people wishing to be involved in this vile industry should be allowed to do so.
If freaky weirdos wish to watch such depravity they too should be allowed to do so, but not until after the age of maturity.
I've no doubt that your mother, sisters and wider family are engaged in the making of pornography but mine certainly aren't.
I've also no doubt that your pornographic star mother and other family members will go where you decide to ''put'' them, but my family have minds of their own and would be appalled such a vocation.
You know you are perverted. Anybody who posts here in any way excusing or supporting any form of pornography is a pervert. I'm not reading any of it, I know well enough what perverts like you will say.
There are only five perverts on this site and you are all of them.
You betray your irrational fascination to perversion by responding to every thread or post even though they may only be loosely connected to the subject.
I'm simply saying, sex that is legal should never be illegal to video, take pics of, or watch.
As the age of consent does vary from state to state (16-18, not 15), since the ability to watch a video is not limited by each state (open internet), the age would have to be restricted to 18+ as a video of a 16 year old would be illegal to view in states in which the age is 17 or 18.
Countries that have legalized all porn, have actually had a drop in underage abuse/rape
Source?
(these are the very same teens we were suppose to be "protecting")
Define "protecting". Are you suggesting any law that might cause a teen to get in trouble should be changed?
Actually 15 is correct in some states, considering that marriage with parental consent is allowed (than once someone is married, consenting to sex is also part of marriage). Actually the age may be even lower if parental consent marriage still goes lower in some states. The age doesn't "have to be" 18+ because ages vary by state. Laws don't "have to be" anything, they can be changed, and many states are already moving to decriminalize sexting.
Source for crime statistics? I'm not Google, go ahead do your own research. Here is one to get you started the Japanese National Police Agency reports the most dramatic decrease in sex crimes was seen when attention was focused on the number and age of rapists and victims among younger groups . We hypothesized that the increase in pornography, without age restriction and in comics, if it had any detrimental effect, would most negatively influence younger individuals. Just the opposite occurred. The number of juvenile offenders dramatically dropped every period reviewed from 1,803 perpetrators to a low of 264; a drop of some 85%. The number of victims also decreased particularly among the females younger than 13. With CP laws in place, 8.3% of the victims were younger than 13. After legalization the percentage of victims younger than 13 years of age dropped to 4.0%.
"Protecting", I'm "suggesting" that innate sexual behavior in teens is completely normal and is not a crime. The true crime here is in adults that impose overarching laws that do far more harm than good.
Actually 15 is correct in some states, considering that marriage with parental consent is allowed
Age of marriage with parental consent and age of consent are two different things. It's quite obvious in that it's the parent giving consent, not the child.
I'm not Google, go ahead do your own research.
No, if you want to make a claim that something is true, the burden of proof is on you.
The true crime here is in adults that impose overarching laws that do far more harm than good.
In what ways? The problem isn't simply two teens sexting or sending pics/videos to each other, but rather they can't keep it private and can quickly get in view of an adult. There was another debate here (likely yours as well) positing that sexting should be legal for teens. My first thought was to agree because whether it's said face to face or via text, what difference does it make? There is a difference in that with a text it will quickly wind up on the internet.
Age of consent and age to marry do indeed have a direct correlation to each other. The key point is teens can legally consent to sex once married (no matter what their age) and parental consent doesn't mean arranged marriage; it means the teens want to get married and the parents give their consent. My apologies on the Google comment, I've just been through these types of debates before and the opposition's go to is often "where is the proof"? Although, to say the burden is on me for my statements, than the burden for proof is also on any counter arguments as well. Harm, in what ways? Well, that's a rather long list and I'll need some time to compile it for you... and yes, the other debate may be mine as well.
I looked on Google and didn't find what you claimed I would find. I have now demonstrated just as much proof as you. Looks like the burden is back on you.
If you looked and didn't find anything that doesn't prove anything. I gave you one example already from Japan, I could provide more but if you didn't see any, you're not looking hard enough. Keep in mind, any evidence that contradicts the main stream "moral" point of view is met with instant hostility and often forcibly removed from the public eye.
There is no such correlation as the teens only consent to sex after the parents had consented to the marriage. I'm not sure the reason for the argument about arranged marriage as I made no such claim. I had already presupposed two teens requested to be married and consent was given. With regards to the burden of proof, it only exists in counter arguments if a claim is made. I had simply asked, "Source?" No claim was made, much less an argument even.
While you didn't make the argument for arranged marriage you certainly made it clear that the parents made the decision to consent (not the teens), "It's quite obvious in that it's the parent giving consent, not the child". Arranged marriage was used as an example, and really isn't the point at hand. The debate here is about poorly written laws that impact even legal acts and harm those they propose to protect.
As for counter argument proof, you stated ages for consent to sex varies between 16 to 18 and no "source" was given (when married that age does indeed drop). So my statement was just bringing light to the inconsistency in expectations for backing up statements with proof (i.e., a source). Also, it is really a general statement and not solely directed at you. Please know, my intent here was just to raise an important issue that has the potential to negatively impact most teens and not write a book sighting sources.
These are irrational laws that do not hold up to intellectually honest scrutiny. Conflating issues, along with "moral" rushes to judgment aren't the answer. I hope we would both agree, that neither of us want to see our kids in jail and on sex predator lists because of sexting or looking at images online? Even if you believe, that your child would never do something like that, just over half of teens do so... and you would most definitely know someone that's in harms way because of these laws (not protected by the laws).
Source for crime statistics? I'm not Google, go ahead do your own research.
Presumably you are talking about the legalisation of child pornography. No such crime statistic will exist because it is illegal in every country within the UN. There is a UN resolution on it.
I did provide the statistics from Japan, go ahead and read my previous comments.
Japanese National Police Agency reports the most dramatic decrease in sex crimes was seen when attention was focused on the number and age of rapists and victims among younger groups . We hypothesized that the increase in pornography, without age restriction and in comics, if it had any detrimental effect, would most negatively influence younger individuals. Just the opposite occurred. The number of juvenile offenders dramatically dropped every period reviewed from 1,803 perpetrators to a low of 264; a drop of some 85%. The number of victims also decreased particularly among the females younger than 13. With CP laws in place, 8.3% of the victims were younger than 13. After legalization the percentage of victims younger than 13 years of age dropped to 4.0%.
The source is Japanese National Police Agency. This is going back and forth, let's just be honest, you already have your mind made up and no data/stats are going to change your mind. But be aware, no matter what you or I think, teens will continue taking nude pics of themselves... and while you may be okay with laws that criminalize them (for something innate and completely normal); I'm not okay with that.
I understand the pressing for an actual source because a 1 minute search resulted in this video from 2014 reporting of Japan passing a law banning the possession of child porn and many articles written since then advising of it's effectiveness. The Czech Republic may allow it, but I cannot find evidence it has been beneficial.
You are right Japan caved in to pressure from the UN and US, despite studies showing reduced risk and lower crimes against children. Considering this, if those studies are indeed correct, they've actually put children, teens, and women at more risk of abuse by banning those images (not less). Also, I know many people will just refuse to believe any study that contradicts their belief... But if they are sure just viewing is so dangerous, the same argument applies to violent images and war crimes; where are all the calls to ban those images?
Here is a link discussing the studies (I've read others but I'm not going to post every link):
I guess your quote is from a pro-pedophile website that you, wisely, won't post a link to.
You are quite misleading in the way you debate. As far as I am aware, "nude" photos of minors are not illegal in the USA. What we are talking about are sexual explicit photos. When you talk about "all porn" you are talking about child pornography.
You don't say what jurisdiction you are talking about. "Viewing" child pornography is not criminalised most countries, whereas possession is. I agree with you that children should not be criminalised for taking or distributing sexual photos of themselves. In many legal systems there is a distinct criminal code for minors so that they are not caught out by laws that were intended to prevent their abuse by adults. This is often not the case in common law jurisdictions (USA, UK, Australia...). However, I know in the UK and USA the prosecution and the police have discretion when deciding whether to prosecute or not - and I would hope in the case of teenagers they do not prosecute. I don't see it as a big issue.
I suspect what your issue really is, is that you want to view child pornography because you personally find it a turn on. I suggest that rather than advertising this all over the net you keep your head below the line of fire. Assuming you're a USAian, admission of being a pedophile is enough to get you investigated and then it will 2 years in prison per image they find. And that is 2 years in a system that allows violence and rape amongst inmates. Is it worth running your mouth off?
Sure, go ahead attack the messenger, that's a great way to debate. Is that a technique you use with everyone you don't agree with?
The link is posted and you assume too much. While you are correct nude images are not illegal at any age, that hasn't stopped wrongful prosecutions. The way the laws are written is too vague and has allowed law enforcement to arrest teens for nude images or perceived inappropriate images. I already have an example of teens wearing pajamas being charged with a crime and nudists as examples (in fact, examples of law enforcement overreaching are very easy to find) Yet, you are okay with this, the laws being misused in this way to wrongfully prosecute teens?
Interesting that you are apparently okay with a prison system that allows "violence and rape". How very Christian of you, yet, this is what you are okay with subjecting anyone who just looks at a picture to? Who really is the one that is the sicko here? My motives are simple, I'm a father of teens and some day I'm sure I'll be a grandfather. I refuse to do nothing and let them be at risk from these absurd laws.
The link is posted and you assume too much. While you are correct nude images are not illegal at any age, that hasn't stopped wrongful prosecutions. The way the laws are written is too vague and has allowed law enforcement to arrest teens for nude images or perceived inappropriate images. I already have an example of teens wearing pajamas being charged with a crime and nudists as examples (in fact, examples of law enforcement overreaching are very easy to find) Yet, you are okay with this, the laws being misused in this way to wrongfully prosecute teens?
Post a link to the case and we can debate it.
nteresting that you are apparently okay with a prison system that allows "violence and rape". How very Christian of you...?.
I am not Christian and no I don't agree with the USA's sentencing of child sex offenders. It is quite particular to the USA. My point was that you shouldn't be saying things online that suggest you are a pedophile. Americans think they have a right to say whatever they want. Maybe they do but sometimes you need to learn when to keep your mouth shut to protect yourself.
I'm a father of teens
Bullshit.
I refuse to do nothing and let them be at risk from these absurd laws.
Tell them not to send sexually explicit photos of themselves to other people. Simple.
This issue is important everywhere. Yes, the USA is where I'm concerned over the overzealous prosecutions.
Posting links to teens that have been charged with sex crimes serves no purpose, are you suggesting this doesn't happen? First of all there are far too many incidents of teens in the U.S . facing charges for sexting and if you don't think that is true you are living under a rock.
I agree that everything we do or say online (or on the phone) is monitored. However, if we don't talk about these issues nothing will change. Some states have changed laws to lessen criminal charges against teens, while that is a small step in the right direction, it's not enough and there really shouldn't be any laws against teens sexting.
I'm a father? "BS", that's just rude and serves no purpose here. Yet, you want me to tell my apparently imaginary teens not to sext or look at porn (of girls their own age), like that's realistic. Why is it so many adults want to force their "moral" values on every one else? By the way, it's not addressing the fact over 50% of teens already sext and/or look at porn. With that in mind, really if you support these types of laws, you are really saying you're okay with criminalizing all of these teens for natural innate behavior.
Posting links to teens that have been charged with sex crimes serves no purpose, are you suggesting this doesn't happen? First of all there are far too many incidents of teens in the U.S . facing charges for sexting and if you don't think that is true you are living under a rock.
I meant the case reports. I don't even know what law you are saying would be violated by 'sexting'.
I agree that everything we do or say online (or on the phone) is monitored. However, if we don't talk about these issues nothing will change. Some states have changed laws to lessen criminal charges against teens, while that is a small step in the right direction, it's not enough and there really shouldn't be any laws against teens sexting.
Okay. Then prepare yourself to potentially spend the rest of your life in jail or at least be put on a public register for life. See if it was worth it. You are doing it for the kids!! So of course it will be right.
y the way, it's not addressing the fact over 50% of teens already sext and/or look at porn.
I would agree with you if only all participants could be confirmed legally consenting. But the industry that makes it has a long history of lieing about or faking consent, plus there is no way an infant could ever consent.
Keep in mind, the issue I'm raising to legalizing is viewing/possession only. You raise a valid point about producing, but that is a separate issue. Also, you are considering just the porn producers... don't forget this impacts teens that sext and nudists as well.
These no fault anything goes Progressives have the intellect of complete morons!
LOOK AROUND! Did you happen to noticed since this sexual revolution, the numbers of our fatherless children keep spiralling upwards?
Did you happen to notice our welfare roles are filled with unwed mothers?
Did you happen to notice how extreme the Democrat party has become with even no restriction abortions?
Did you happen to notice there are approx. one million Babies aborted every year compared to far less than that in the 60's or before?
DO YOU CARE? Of course not. You are the self love progressives who care nothing that our ntion is going bankrupt fiscally (20 TRILLION IN DEBT) and morally.
Your no fault sexual revolution is a complete failure, but idiots will keep spewing complete lies tht it is doing just fine.
Ask all these children with no fathers at home. Ask them how it's doing.
How does this relate to the argument? We're discussing whether or not porn/nudity should be legal to view. Even if it is part of the "sexual revolution", it's not related to abortion.
Well if you do not know how the sexual revolution has led to more porn, nudity, sex on TV, constant sexual imputs into people's minds, etc.
These things lead to a much much much more promiscuous culture which creates all the problems I described.
Abortion is the Left's answer to the results of this sexual revolution. The Left hates the very mention of moral values so their only answer to all the pregnancies created from this self love sexual revolution, is abortion.
Moral values were once lifted up to keep our culture sexually responsible. Today, they have censored any dialogue on moral values in the public square. Their only answer is to kill the Baby.
I can't believe you need to have my remarks explained. It should be obvious what has been going on for decades in this culture.
"Did you happen to notice"... Honestly, I think you have a tag line for your YouTube channel (no really, I think it is a good tag line and if someone isn't already doing it, you should). Also, too many off topic issues to discuss here but thank you for the comments.
They're a bunch of perverts, their lust is the primary reason they will not seek God's mercy, they love their sin more than life and fool themselves into thinking they are exempt from Hell or that it won't be fire forever so they can be relieved....I won't read any of their garbage here.