This topic is locked from further discussion.
"granny tranny" :lol: Now thats an image I want to get out my head :xLame. People are so uptight about sex in a public forum, even if they browse their favorite granny tranny websites behind closed doors.
Schwah
[QUOTE="stepnkev"]
[QUOTE="D_Battery"]
I did not say that this was an explicitly religious matter. However, adversity to pornography is largely (if not entirely) cultural. If one was to grow up being conditioned to believe that pornography was perfectly acceptable, there would likely be less resistance to it. This is not to say that adversity to pornography exists solely within American Christian morality, that would be preposterous, but in this circumstance it is the primary contributing factor.
D_Battery
This is my point. You have no idea Christian morality was the primary factor, only an assumption. You do not have to be raised in a religious home to believe pornography is unacceptable as you mentioned. I see nothing that can point this to religion or Christianity. There was no mention of anyone's beliefs in the video.
If you only look at it at the surface level, no it is not a matter of religion. Christian values have also determined cultural values though, which tend to in turn influence the values of individual families. To say that the values of an atheist family living in America are comparable to an atheist family living in the Congo would be quite unreasonable because of the differing cultural factors, factors which are not always of a religious nature, but quite often are.
I think you are just getting a little picky on certain values. I see no reason at all to even remotely point this towards Christianity values. This was individuals' decisions'. We do not know any of their reasons for firing the gentlemen except that his wife participated in these videos on the Internet.
I did get a good laugh out that one reporter "I was forced to check out the web site", "I was forced to watch her videos for research" :lol:
[QUOTE="D_Battery"]
[QUOTE="stepnkev"]
This is my point. You have no idea Christian morality was the primary factor, only an assumption. You do not have to be raised in a religious home to believe pornography is unacceptable as you mentioned. I see nothing that can point this to religion or Christianity. There was no mention of anyone's beliefs in the video.
If you only look at it at the surface level, no it is not a matter of religion. Christian values have also determined cultural values though, which tend to in turn influence the values of individual families. To say that the values of an atheist family living in America are comparable to an atheist family living in the Congo would be quite unreasonable because of the differing cultural factors, factors which are not always of a religious nature, but quite often are.
I think you are just getting a little picky on certain values. I see no reason at all to even remotely point this towards Christianity values. This was individuals' decisions'. We do not know any of their reasons for firing the gentlemen except that his wife participated in these videos on the Internet.
I did get a good laugh out that one reporter "I was forced to check out the web site", "I was forced to watch her videos for research" :lol:
Let me ask you this then: do you think the councillors feared backlash if they didn't fire him? If it has nothing to do with Christian values, why would they?[QUOTE="stepnkev"][QUOTE="D_Battery"]
If you only look at it at the surface level, no it is not a matter of religion. Christian values have also determined cultural values though, which tend to in turn influence the values of individual families. To say that the values of an atheist family living in America are comparable to an atheist family living in the Congo would be quite unreasonable because of the differing cultural factors, factors which are not always of a religious nature, but quite often are.
D_Battery
I think you are just getting a little picky on certain values. I see no reason at all to even remotely point this towards Christianity values. This was individuals' decisions'. We do not know any of their reasons for firing the gentlemen except that his wife participated in these videos on the Internet.
I did get a good laugh out that one reporter "I was forced to check out the web site", "I was forced to watch her videos for research" :lol:
Let me ask you this then: do you think the councillors feared backlash if they didn't fire him? If it has nothing to do with Christian values, why would they?I really don't know what they feared. I don't know the councilors. All I know is their decision wasn't the right one in my opinion meaning I would rather not make assumptions. I don't think it really matters though whether they did nor not. As we both mentioned already. A distaste for pornography does not have to come from a religious person
[QUOTE="D_Battery"][QUOTE="stepnkev"]
I think you are just getting a little picky on certain values. I see no reason at all to even remotely point this towards Christianity values. This was individuals' decisions'. We do not know any of their reasons for firing the gentlemen except that his wife participated in these videos on the Internet.
I did get a good laugh out that one reporter "I was forced to check out the web site", "I was forced to watch her videos for research" :lol:
Let me ask you this then: do you think the councillors feared backlash if they didn't fire him? If it has nothing to do with Christian values, why would they?I really don't know what they feared. I don't know the councilors. All I know is their decision wasn't the right one in my opinion meaning I would rather not make assumptions. I don't think it really matters though whether they did nor not. As we both mentioned already. A distaste for pornography does not have to come from a religious person
Would it be wholly unreasonable to reach the conclusion that I did though? Are there any obvious logical fallacies in the argument I've forwarded? Is my argument implausible or even unlikely? I think it holds up pretty well to Ockham's razor, but I need lunch... so I'll leave the debate to the rest of you.I think that sounds silly. Even if they can do so as it is stated in the contract. Who his wife is and what she does, doesn't really affect his work and performance at work.Treflis
He has a position to hold. A man of his stature cant be seen with a prostitute around his arm.
I just read the story on Verizon.
My favorite part of the article is when they said what a good job he was doing, but they decided to fire him after they found out about his wife's job and denied it was because of his wife's job.
That really sucks. At least he still has his hawt wife. :P
shoot-first
Because everyone in porn is hot right?
The pictures they showed in the video showed a women, who in my mind, was mediocre looking.
[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"][QUOTE="BadBrain21"] Umm... no he doesn't. have you watched the video? everything was done within legal terms. the council doesn't have to give a reason for his firing. i'm glad politicians like him got fired. he was an old geezer dating a gold digger. he effectively bought his relationship from someone who sold her body for the purpose of attaining money. and please don't suggest the possibility of actualy love. how often does a young pornstar get with an rich geezer politician because of love? there's nothing wrong with dating a former pornstar provided there's a chance at a serious relationship, but let me tell you, this couple ain't definitely one of them. people like him and her should not be given the chance of success in life on such easy terms. im thoroughly grossed out at the thought of people like her **** her way to success and people like him in high positions. i can't even coun't the number of times i've seen and heard of women dating old bears for the sole purpose of money.BadBrain21
1. There are things called "extenuating circumstances". Did the contract say "without reason"? Yes, but if you do a good job, have the support of the community, and are fired for personal decisions then you, at the least, have a right to appeal.
2. As for the personal life, thats not for us to judge and certainly not make assumptions on. And besides, did you see the two? This isnt Anna Nicole, marrying an 80+ year old guy while she is in here 20s. This looks like a young 30/late 20s marrying a 50-something year old...its not that bad.
3. Why is it so crazy to suggest love? Pornstars and politicians are people too, and they likely have more in common with eachother than we like to admit (they both sell an exagerated image of themselves to the masses).
4. Yes, young women often date old men for money. But young women also date young men because of money. Its an undeniable fact that women of any age marry men of any age often for financial security. Not all the time, mind you, but a lot of the time it is a major factor.
5. Please get over your bias...this was a good man doing a good job as a politician. Even if all the things you say about his personal life are true, why is that such a bad thing? Its a mutually beneficial relationship; the wife is happy because she has support, and the man is happy because he has a pretty young thing to come home to every night.
Sounds like a good deal to me
sure you do. doesn't mean you'll ever win a case though. the intention becomes more transport when someone like her marries an old vegetable like him. i refuse to accept people like that living the easy life by sitting at their private swimming pools, sipping from cocktails, getting a tan, driving in hummers etc. i know that things like that aren't easy to get rid of if you want to maintain a level of freedom in your country, but im glad to see that high-profile acts of depravity are still looked down upon. the media would explode if the pres of the usa were to do the same thing. what a double-standart.wow...way to generalize. I guess a 50-60 year old cant marry a 25-30 year old and live peacefully...
Also, did you see McCain's wife? The media didnt explode over that one bit.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment