Originally posted by rogue06
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Netflix indicted on child pornography for "Cuties"
Collapse
X
-
Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette
-
Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
The correct phrase, legally, is probably "child exploitation". From what I see, it doesn't meet the criteria for porn. But we'll see I guess.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostNetflix indicted on child porn charges over 'Cuties'
By Victor Morton - The Washington Times
Tuesday, October 6, 2020
A Texas grand jury has indicted streaming giant Netflix on child pornography charges.
The indictment accuses Netflix and its top executives of “promotion of lewd visual material depicting [a] child” with regard to the controversial French film “Cuties.”
State Rep. Matt Schaefer, Tyler Republican, posted a copy of the first page of the Tyler County grand jury’s finding on his Twitter page.
According to the indictment, which was handed down Sept. 23 but only revealed Tuesday, Netflix did “knowingly promote visual material which depicts the lewd exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of a clothed or partially clothed child who was younger than 18 years of age at the time.”
The indictment goes on to note, relevant to the legal definitions of pornography, that the visual material in “Cuties” appeals to the prurient interest in sex, and has no serious, literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”
more at: https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2...s-over-cuties/
Comment
-
Originally posted by mossrose View Post
I understand that you have no plans to watch it, Leon. Just saying that sometimes we know something is wrong even if we don't see it.
Following indirectly is an option, and certainly a better one.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by mossrose View Post
I understand that you have no plans to watch it, Leon. Just saying that sometimes we know something is wrong even if we don't see it.
Following indirectly is an option, and certainly a better one.
I remember I decided to watch The Last Temptation Of Christ when it came out because I wanted to see for myself if it was blasphemous. I didn't get far enough into it to find out. It was so awful I shut it off after 10 minutes.
- 2 likes
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ronson View Post
In this case, there is sufficient shock and outrage - including people I trust from a liberal standpoint - that this film is unacceptable. Normally I do prefer to judge for myself, but this might be like looking at a nasty car accident; If you do look you may end up seeing something that will give you nightmares.
I remember I decided to watch The Last Temptation Of Christ when it came out because I wanted to see for myself if it was blasphemous. I didn't get far enough into it to find out. It was so awful I shut it off after 10 minutes.
Last Temptation is vile.
Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mossrose View Post
And I had heard about this latest offering from Amazon and not seen any clips or otherwise except the one picture that rogue posted somewhere on the site. Don't need to see it to know it's bad.
Last Temptation is vile.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostMaybe because the program was obscene and should have never been produced let alone broadcast?
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostIt was rated TV-MA, meaning that the rating board felt that the the content should not be viewed by anybody under the age of 18, so why on earthy did they have 11-year olds starring in it!
However, shots of genitalia and buttocks is not in, and of itself, pornography. That it is considered to be so is in the eye of the beholder. I have no idea why some Americans get so upset over nudity on the screen yet remaining comparatively sanguine about graphic violence.
I also assume that such Americans never visit an Art gallery!"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostThe film actually deals with the sexualisation of young girls.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
- 2 likes
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostYes, by actually sexualizing young girls. I suppose you could call it a case of art imitating life imitating art.
"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostHave you seen the film? Or are you simply responding to what others have written about it?
The film actually deals with the sexualisation of young girls.
So, can I film a movie where I shoot someone in the face and then be cool by claiming that it's just showing the problems and how terrible it is to shoot people in the face? Not surprised our resident european liberal is defending a film like this.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gondwanaland View PostBy..... sexualizing young girls.......
So, can I film a movie where I shoot someone in the face and then be cool by claiming that it's just showing the problems and how terrible it is to shoot people in the face? Not surprised our resident european liberal is defending a film like this."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
|
16 responses
142 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by One Bad Pig
Today, 11:55 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
53 responses
391 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 11:32 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
25 responses
113 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:36 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
33 responses
197 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Today, 07:43 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
84 responses
365 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by JimL
Today, 11:08 AM
|
Comment