Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Leisure and Society
Society
Regions of the World
Australian & New Zealand
Family First member in inappropriate content scandal
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="GodsoldierClintus" data-source="post: 40192483" data-attributes="member: 189419"><p>**runs back**</p><p></p><p>So basically FF are advocating that there be inappropriate content filters mandatories installed in libraries and having ISP bans on inappropriate content. </p><p></p><p>I don't have a problem with that policy, but as I have said before a lot of Christian males would have problem with inappropriate content. And in the secular society itself, you would argue that whilst inappropriate content may not be "tasteful" it's still widely accepted.</p><p></p><p>To me it's starting to feel like a lot of FF policy, a blanket response for the family which does not really deal with the real issue. Banning inappropriate content is not looking at the root issues of inappropriate content - lust, and changing cultural views of inappropriate content, sex, lust, woman, even man. </p><p></p><p>The problem of inappropriate content is much more than just demeaning to women, I would feel obviously child inappropriate content is a much more disgusting issue, but inappropriate content itself is a society reflection of how it views sex and relationships. Banning inappropriate content is not going to change those. If a kid can't get inappropriate content on the net, there will be some other way to do it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="GodsoldierClintus, post: 40192483, member: 189419"] **runs back** So basically FF are advocating that there be inappropriate content filters mandatories installed in libraries and having ISP bans on inappropriate content. I don't have a problem with that policy, but as I have said before a lot of Christian males would have problem with inappropriate content. And in the secular society itself, you would argue that whilst inappropriate content may not be "tasteful" it's still widely accepted. To me it's starting to feel like a lot of FF policy, a blanket response for the family which does not really deal with the real issue. Banning inappropriate content is not looking at the root issues of inappropriate content - lust, and changing cultural views of inappropriate content, sex, lust, woman, even man. The problem of inappropriate content is much more than just demeaning to women, I would feel obviously child inappropriate content is a much more disgusting issue, but inappropriate content itself is a society reflection of how it views sex and relationships. Banning inappropriate content is not going to change those. If a kid can't get inappropriate content on the net, there will be some other way to do it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Leisure and Society
Society
Regions of the World
Australian & New Zealand
Family First member in inappropriate content scandal
Top
Bottom