First Openly Gay Congressman dies... hero or villain?

Nemesis Juggernaut writes: I am puzzled about how you came up with the figure 99.8%. If the relationship is linear, wouldn't such a figure indicate that societies that do not have access to pornography would have a 0.2% per capita rate of sexual deviance?This goes back to the question of definitions.What is sexual deviance? Please define.Also what is pornography? Please define.As I have discovered through the school of hard knocks here, without establishing a proper definition of terms either at the outset or at least at the point of assertion, posts soon lose any meaning whatsoever.Edited by anglagard, : percentage off.

NJ writes: I think you have made your stand against pornography quite clear. However to keep saying "I am against pornography" really begs the following questions.What is pornography?Is your definition of pornography violent images associated with sex? depictions of the sexual act in a manner you don't approve of? any depitions of the sexual act? is it nakedness of white people? nakedness of all people? double beds? cleavage? on-screen kissing? liberalism? evolution? science? Without your definition, your statement becomes meaningless.Given that you could define pornography, how would one approach the problem? fines?, jail?, castration?, beheading?Also, would your definition and solution be acceptable to those who make judicial decisions concerning free speech?, the majority of voters?, evangelical christians?Are you proposing that you alone should hold the office of censor, a position that has not been held since the Roman Empire?IMO until you can answer these questions, your statements are empty complaints which are not to be taken seriously.

What you have provided is the definition of pornography that is currently used by the US government, which obviously allows all this pornography that you are objecting to. The government definition is not what I asked for, I asked for your definition, as you seem to desire a stricter standard than currently allowed under US legal opinion.NJ writes: I am unfamiliar with such rehabilitation being commonly used for drug offenders in the US. Here in Texas, it's straight to the joint, no rehab for all but the most minor infractions that used to be ticketed offenses prior to the ascent of Reagan. Not really, you have not even provided a definition of this pornography you are railing against other than the government definition that allows what we have now. Answer my question concerning your (not the government's) definition of pornography first.