Pornography on the Internet

[socrates]

I was amazed a couple of years ago, when I first went online, about the amount of pornography which floated about in cyberspace. Being a sociology scholar, I naturally pondered on this and asked many questions in my head as to why and how and what and where and if etc etc.

Recently here in Ireland the Garda Siochana(Police) conducted raids on about 100 homes and businesses throughout the state in a bid to crack down on child pornography, which reulted in about one or two arrested based on these individuals downloading images of child pornography. What struck me was that it seems to be deemed okay to view this material but it is illegal to download it.

Many questions went through my mind.

How can I protect my children whilst using the computer?
Isnt all pornography wrong?
Is it possible to distinguish wrong by one downloading as opposed to browsing?
Do different states have different laws concerning this stuff?
Are there dedicated law enforcement teams monotoring these sites?
If one is arrested for downloading material, why not stop it at the source?

Question two got me. If the abuse of children is wrong, which of course it is, isnt the abuse of non consenting adults as bad. These poor individuals who are humiliated may not be compus mentus due to drug/alcohol addiction etc. When is a child not a child? Adulthood as we all know is a social construction. It is not a biological fact. Two kids who turn 16 on the same day may be deemed to be adults in my country but are they both mentally mature to make decisions such as getting involved in pornography. Wouldnt it make sense for states to impose an age 25 rule to give a wide margin of error?

Downloading as opposed to Browsing. Morally who can seperate them? The act of browsing obviously could be done by many individuals with alternative goals. One could be sinister, one could be monoring, one could be researching, one could be innocently stumbling on a site. So to actually prosecute would be impossible. But to download and take physical custody of images is different, but still vague. ie a hard disc as opposed to a cdrom/floppy, a hard disc as opposed to cyberstorage? Again very difficult to prosecute.

Another question came to mind. I am a christian and believe this stuff is morally wrong. But whose to say I am correct? Sites which offer content for and by consenting adults are I suppose legally supportable. But there is a distinguishable difference between the legal and the moral.

When doed the line blur between abusive pornography and hard core, hard core and soft core, soft core and 'tasteful' modelling, 'tasteful' modelling and modelling. There are no demarcation lines drawn in the sand. Also how would one know if they were browsing particular sites. ie A site may offer 'teen photos' but who can prove they are teens, they could be older or younger.

Another question which came to mind was this. Isnt the internet the champion of freedom. No holds barred. The ultimate in free information and exchange. When does the internet become another instrument which has been suddenly become the intellectual property of a particular state or goverment.
Also, who would prosecute whom in case where 'x' is one country, viewing something in another country whilst the server is in another country being fed by 'y' in another country? Mind boggling.

Not the nicest of subjects, but I am sure many of you out there have considered many of the points I have put, and I think thius is a valid topic for discussion.

Good Health
[font=courier new]