There's a lot for me to address here, so if I miss something, I apologize.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
I guess that what I'm trying to say is that traumatic experiences can limit ones ability to make a choice that is free or rational or in ones best interests. That is part of what is so very tragic about people having abusive traumatic experiences.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

I'm not arguing that isn't so. I'm saying, even so, a person has to be free to decide for him/herself, even if past events color those decisions. And even if the choice one makes is detrimental to oneself.

I don't think you understand the laws and practices in the United States. People do care about not hurting others, as a whole. Caring about individual rights doesn't exclude that. People want responsible gun ownership. True enough, there are a lot of irresponsible gun owners, but those who can handle guns safely, should be allowed to.

Everytime I hear this anti-gun attitude, especially from those outside the USA, I never here this point addressed: If you removed every gun from everyone registered to own one, you'd still have the criminals having them. Some criminals even make them. How the hell can people defend their homes when gun-toting criminals break in? How can they protect themselves (or at least, have a chance of protecting themselves) elsewhere? Yes, guns can end up in the wrong hands, even when they started in the right hands. But you have a better chance of protecting yourself from someone who has a gun if you have one yourself. This is one of the reasons cops carry guns. Criminals get guns on the street and underground. Lots of things happen underground. How do you propose finding and stopping such crimes?

Far more children die in swimming pool accidents than by guns in homes, yet I'm willing to bet you'd be more concerned about a gun in the home than a swimming pool in the yard.

You don't have a right to hurt someone physically or infringe upon their rights in the US. You imply otherwise. The US is based upon our Constitution, which gives us the right to bear arms. We have the right to protect ourselves, even from the government itself (that's the idea, anyway; the government has too much power over the people in these times, however).

I never said our freedoms were unlimited. But we should have as much freedom as possible, as long as it doesn't infringe on another's rights. Some people have argued that we should have the right to yell, "Fire!" in a theater or whatever, and if harm comes as a result, we should be responsible for that. That's about absolute free speech. I'm not saying I agree with that, but there are other ideas than what you typically hear.

It's debated as to whether sex with minors harms every one. Most believe it does hurt every one. But there are a lot of adults that have sex with minors who don't get punished for it, and I don't mean those who don't get caught. I've seen many parents who don't have a man arrested for having sex with their daughter, and sometimes even support them. (Don't get me started on that.)

Some people feel being a Goth hurts the Goth and sometimes others, in the sense of upsetting one's parents. The point is, if someone disapproves, I don't feel they should have a right to make decisions for the Goth because they feel s/he has mental problems or something and is incapable of making the "right" decisions for him/herself.

I'm not arguing that abstinence-only programs are screwed up and harming kids. (By the way, not all schools use them; some have refused the government's money and chosen to continue teaching more accurate sexual information.) That's something that needs to be fixed.

I don't think porn has anything to do with a man feeling he shouldn't have to stop if a woman says no. I think that goes to deeper issues, and the still-prevalent-in-some belief that men are superior to women. Also goes to selfishness.

I have seen condoms used in porn, albeit rarely. Again, sex education is important. I'm absolutely all for porn stars using condoms, though.

Rape fantasies are common among women, so I have no problem with seeing them in porn, depending on the kind of rape fantasy. For a long time, I thought all rape fantasies were basically the same: As you often see in the older romance novels, a man might rape a woman (not necessarily violently, but as in one scene I remember, where the heroine was asleep nude outdoors, and the hero, who didn't know her then, came upon her, and found her beautiful, began kissing and touching her, causing her to moan in her sleep, eventually leading to intercourse, which is when the pleasure for her ended, as he broke her hymen and she snapped awake), and her body aches for him. Some of these scenes are a turn-off for me, some aren't. But then a woman shared her rape fantasy with an adult fantasies group I used to be in, and it really shocked me. Her fantasy involved being in a club, being drugged and taken from said club, and violently raped. In the romance novel fantasy, the heroine enjoys it, but in her fantasy, the victim does not, but it turns her on, nevertheless. I admit, I don't relate to that kind of fantasy. But there is indeed rape porn, and I don't mean like romance novel rape. I haven't seen any of these movies, but I've seen ads for them, where women are not only raped violently, but tortured, hung on hooks, and had horrible things done to them. I don't get that. And I admit, I'd wonder about anyone who wanted to watch it. But I wouldn't blame the porn on his or her actions; I think there was something wrong with the individual to begin with.

I suppose people are sticking with the "porn causes people to rape" thing because it's sexual, and rape uses sex as a weapon. Do you want to make an argument about other forms of violence?

If someone wants to sleep with their step-daughter, they had a problem before porn. Being turned on by porn isn't going to change what they already were.

I disagree that rape fantasies, in and of themselves, are "sick." Most sex experts agree. In a rape fantasy, the fantasizer is in control of everything that happens, and there are no dangers. People like to fantasize about giving up control, or having it taken away, but in a safe way.

Sidony spoke well. I agree with her points.