[plug] [OT] Arguments in favour?

[Oliver White]

Leon Brooks wrote:

> Tom Atkinson wrote:
> >
> > Well now, for starters, what is the problem with children seeing
> > pornographic material anyway?
>
> > What effect is it supposed to have on them?
>
> > Up to a certain age, it would be meaningless; beyond about 15 they would
> > be knowledgable of sex and about to begin partaking.  During another,
> > earlier period, it would probably be more educational than anything
> > else!
>
> > Could somebody please enlighten me?
>
> Children aren't shown pornography for much the same reason that they
> aren't allowed to drive until they're 17: the results are almost
> inevitably destructive and painful. Drivers licences are easier to
> restrain and monitor than hormones.

Not quite as easy to revoke though, huh? Really, repressing your feelings
never results in anything good, in my limited experiance. I'm not saying kids
should have access to porn, but I think limiting their access to sex
education, as will more than likely happen with this legislation, will have a
highly detrimental effect. There's nothing really wrong with pictures of sex
acts, just their context. All in my not so humble opinion, of course.