Fundies develop new porn blocking scheme

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2003-03-10 07:56am

http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,57962,00.html

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-03-10 11:50am

Well golly, I guess adults can't be trusted to make their own decisions.

Edit: It would be funny if some guy joined that specifically so he could go to a bunch of porn sites and piss off the fundies.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-03-10 11:53am

ph34r the changing times, fundies!

This idea is stupid. Sharing records??

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-03-10 11:54am

neoolong wrote:Well golly, I guess adults can't be trusted to make their own decisions.

Of course not

We is igknowrent

Edit: It would be funny if some guy joined that specifically so he could go to a bunch of porn sites and piss off the fundies.

A lot do just that...weird how they assemble this huge collection of porn and people join so it's easier for them to find.

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2003-03-10 12:27pm

Hey, actually that's not a half bad idea. It's not for people who like casually surfing for porn, it's for those people who want to give it up or has a real problem with it. I think it's a pretty good idea, nothing like peer pressure.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2003-03-10 12:41pm

And the first time you have an occurence of this bullshit, you're fux0red! Just accessing something like that is illegal, even if you're forced against your will.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-03-10 12:47pm

Holy shit, I want to sign up for this. I want to just pick some random person to receive my web surfing logs and wait for them to send me E-mail about how I'm failing Jesus by visiting pr0n sites all the time. I say we should all do it.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2003-03-10 12:50pm

Durandal wrote:Holy shit, I want to sign up for this. I want to just pick some random person to receive my web surfing logs and wait for them to send me E-mail about how I'm failing Jesus by visiting pr0n sites all the time. I say we should all do it.

I'd do it but I'm too busy with other things. Damn Quake, MP3s, and jacking-off-all-the-time-to-internet-porn...

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2003-03-10 12:52pm

Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:And the first time you have an occurence of this bullshit, you're fux0red! Just accessing something like that is illegal, even if you're forced against your will.

Just read it, LOL. I thought Hitler was into the whole shitting/feces things

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2003-03-10 01:32pm

Hitler was a damn Puritan. Vegetarian, no alcohol, no vice ANYTHING. If the guy lived in this day and age, he'd be what Falwell and Phelps would jerk off to.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-03-10 01:55pm

I`m sure if we could snoop around the house of a fundy we`ll find his porn collection and on his PC all the porn site he visit regularly

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-03-10 02:03pm

Vorlon1701 wrote:Hitler was a damn Puritan. Vegetarian, no alcohol, no vice ANYTHING. If the guy lived in this day and age, he'd be what Falwell and Phelps would jerk off to.

Sure, if you consider aggressively invading other countries, starting one of the most bloody conflicts in human history and orchestrated a nearly successful genocide attempt on the Jews through starvation, ovens, gas chambers, poison showers and concentration camps while offering a few more weeks of life to those who would dig the graves for their fellow Jews, "no vice anything."

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2003-03-10 02:49pm

Given the worldwide statistics of priests that have been found guilty of child molestation, whenever you see one it's statistically safe to just assume that he's also in on it.

Companion Cube · Post by **Companion Cube** » 2003-03-10 02:51pm

Covington said the service, which costs about $4 a month, has attracted close to 12,000 users since its launch in October.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-03-10 03:27pm

I don't see the problem with this. It's their own choice to join. It's not like they're trying to prevent other people from seeing it.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-03-10 03:29pm

RedImperator wrote:I don't see the problem with this. It's their own choice to join. It's not like they're trying to prevent other people from seeing it.

The reasoning behind it is that pornography is bad. That's the problem.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-10 03:42pm

3rd Impact wrote:
Covington said the service, which costs about $4 a month, has attracted close to 12,000 users since its launch in October.

That's really not that many morons, especially considering its been about five months. I'd have expected more.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-03-10 03:46pm

neoolong wrote:
RedImperator wrote:I don't see the problem with this. It's their own choice to join. It's not like they're trying to prevent other people from seeing it.
The reasoning behind it is that pornography is bad. That's the problem.

They're entitled to their opinions. If they're not trying to force it on me, why should I give a shit?

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-03-10 03:49pm

RedImperator wrote:
neoolong wrote:
RedImperator wrote:I don't see the problem with this. It's their own choice to join. It's not like they're trying to prevent other people from seeing it.
The reasoning behind it is that pornography is bad. That's the problem.
They're entitled to their opinions. If they're not trying to force it on me, why should I give a shit?

Actually the article says he's "urging" people to do it.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-03-10 03:51pm

neoolong wrote:
RedImperator wrote:
neoolong wrote: The reasoning behind it is that pornography is bad. That's the problem.
They're entitled to their opinions. If they're not trying to force it on me, why should I give a shit?
Actually the article says he's "urging" people to do it.

Believe it or not, there's nothing wrong with trying to convince people to see things your way, either. Would you rather have this or the Communications Decency Act?

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-03-10 03:56pm

RedImperator wrote: Believe it or not, there's nothing wrong with trying to convince people to see things your way, either. Would you rather have this or the Communications Decency Act?

Oh, because pornography is of course wrong, and moralistic web users shouldn't have access to it. And all religious folks should be urged to shy away from it. Because adults need people like him to make decisions for them.

This isn't convincing people of one's opinion. This is telling people they're too stupid to do things for themselves.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-03-10 04:02pm

neoolong wrote:Oh, because pornography is of course wrong, and moralistic web users shouldn't have access to it. And all religious folks should be urged to shy away from it. Because adults need people like him to make decisions for them.

This isn't convincing people of one's opinion. This is telling people they're too stupid to do things for themselves.

Did you read the same article I did? It's totally voluntary. Its for people who WANT to stop viewing pornography. Their beliefs might not be rational, but they're entitled to them, and this is damned sight better than trying to jam their views down the throats of nonbelievers, which is their usual standard operating procedure.

Pu-239 · Post by **Pu-239** » 2003-03-10 04:04pm

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=14721

COPA is struck down. What are the implications of this?

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-03-10 04:07pm

RedImperator wrote:
neoolong wrote:Oh, because pornography is of course wrong, and moralistic web users shouldn't have access to it. And all religious folks should be urged to shy away from it. Because adults need people like him to make decisions for them.

This isn't convincing people of one's opinion. This is telling people they're too stupid to do things for themselves.
Did you read the same article I did? It's totally voluntary. Its for people who WANT to stop viewing pornography. Their beliefs might not be rational, but they're entitled to them, and this is damned sight better than trying to jam their views down the throats of nonbelievers, which is their usual standard operating procedure.

Yes I did read the article. Did you? The implications of his tactics is what I don't agree with. Yes it is volutary. The way he goes about it makes it wrong in my opinion.

Post by **NecronLord** » 2003-03-10 04:22pm

I could swear that I posted in this thread before.