I agree with Crispin. However, on a "discussion" level, the problem is that some people have defined "pornography" as negative to start with. However, the same media content may be considered pornography by one and not by another. In that situation, the statement becomes true by definition. :-( And in fact, the Supreme Court has left pornography laws in exactly that situation, "community standards." Jimmy -----Original Message----- From: crime-bounces@private [mailto:crime-bounces@private] On Behalf Of Crispin Cowan Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 5:38 PM To: Mancini, Steve Cc: crime@private; crime@private Subject: Re: [Crime] : Guidelines for Safe Internet brownsing for minors It says quite clearly on page 13 "Talk with your children about the existence and nature of pornography; as they reach puberty, assure them that there's nothing wrong with being interested in sex, but that pornography is not a healthy way of learning about wholesome, loving relations." I take issue with their claim that porn is not healthy :) To the contrary, attempting to suppress sexual interests is what is not healthy. IMHO, of course. Crispin Mancini, Steve wrote: > I did a powerskim of the content, seems the advice is sound. Good > manual for the novices out there. > > > http://www2.norwich.edu/mkabay/cyberwatch/cybersafety.pdf > _______________________________________________ > Crime mailing list > Crime@private > http://lists.whiteknighthackers.com/mailman/listinfo/crime > -- Crispin Cowan, Ph.D. http://crispincowan.com/~crispin/ Director of Software Engineering, Novell http://novell.com _______________________________________________ Crime mailing list Crime@private http://lists.whiteknighthackers.com/mailman/listinfo/crime _______________________________________________ Crime mailing list Crime@private http://lists.whiteknighthackers.com/mailman/listinfo/crime
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Apr 28 2006 - 07:03:09 PDT