NationStates Jolt Archive


Two years in prison for showing a navel?

Drunk commies deleted
07-02-2006, 19:04
Indonesia is debating a new anti-ponography law.

The draft document includes articles which would make it an offence to show what it calls sensual body parts, including the navel, hips and thighs.

Those found guilty of breaking the law could face a two-year jail sentence.


Seems a little insane to me.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4689054.stm
JuNii
07-02-2006, 19:09
"It is terrible, our poor country. We are a religious people but now Indonesia is third worst in the world for porn after Scandinavia and Russia.
wow... America isn't in the top three?

Alright Gals and Guys, we have alot of work to do now! :D
Utracia
07-02-2006, 19:09
Does anyone have time to try to enforce such trivial matters?
Mariehamn
07-02-2006, 19:11
There's dumb laws everywhere.

*gets to work so America is in the top three porn consumers*
Deep Kimchi
07-02-2006, 19:12
wow... America isn't in the top three?

Alright Gals and Guys, we have alot of work to do now! :D

It is officially legal to moon people in Maryland. Go figure.
Kzord
07-02-2006, 19:12
Somehow I am not surprised by this news.
Drunk commies deleted
07-02-2006, 19:17
wow... America isn't in the top three?

Alright Gals and Guys, we have alot of work to do now! :D
I'm doing my part, but I'm only one man. One very sore man.
Bottle
07-02-2006, 19:21
Ahh, good old sex-phobia! It's nice to see that traditional values like shame, self-loathing, and body-hatred are still alive and well.
Minoriteeburg
07-02-2006, 19:24
for dumb american laws go here www.dumblaws.com (http://www.dumblaws.com/)

some examples of laws in PA

A person is not eligible to become Governor if he/she has participated in a duel.

Any motorist who sights a team of horses coming toward him must pull well off the road, cover his car with a blanket or canvas that blends with the countryside, and let the horses pass.

It is illegal to have over 16 women live in a house together because that constitutes a brothel
Kecibukia
07-02-2006, 19:25
It is illegal to have over 16 women live in a house together because that constitutes a brothel

If that's true I'm going to hit the women's college dorms w/ a fat wallet. :)
Kzord
07-02-2006, 19:25
Ahh, good old sex-phobia! It's nice to see that traditional values like shame, self-loathing, and body-hatred are still alive and well.

Nicely summed up.
Utracia
07-02-2006, 19:26
Ahh, good old sex-phobia! It's nice to see that traditional values like shame, self-loathing, and body-hatred are still alive and well.

Hey if they don't want pornography in their country that is certainly their choice. Unfortunately they are taking it to such extremes as to make it ridiculous.
Letila
07-02-2006, 19:27
Navels are sensual body parts now?
Minoriteeburg
07-02-2006, 19:27
If that's true I'm going to hit the women's college dorms w/ a fat wallet. :)


sorrority brothels. you dont need money most of the time you just need beer.
Bottle
07-02-2006, 19:34
Hey if they don't want pornography in their country that is certainly their choice. Unfortunately they are taking it to such extremes as to make it ridiculous.
Never said it wasn't their choice. I believe all people are free to be complete and utter morons. It's just amazing to me how many of them choose to exercise that freedom.
Muffinkuchen
07-02-2006, 19:35
indonesia's headed in the right direction. seems like the bible belt will catch onto it soon enough and make something similar.
Utracia
07-02-2006, 19:40
Never said it wasn't their choice. I believe all people are free to be complete and utter morons. It's just amazing to me how many of them choose to exercise that freedom.

Perhaps they just want to have their own morals? Cut the foolishness with showing your navel and they are simply choosing not to have smut in their country.
Damor
07-02-2006, 19:41
Navels are sensual body parts now?On cute girls? Definitely, they've been for as long as I can remember..
They're right up there with shoulders..
And elbows ;) (I wonder if anyone get's that one)
Anarchic Conceptions
07-02-2006, 20:20
Navels are sensual body parts now?

depends who you are...

http://forum.thecolonies.net/Smileys/default/icon_shiftyeyes.gif
PsychoticDan
07-02-2006, 20:26
Navels are sensual body parts now?
Not much sex, ha? Of course they are. There are other parts on a woman that are sensual besides the breasts and vagina. If you're a woman and you don't know that I feel sorry for you and you need to find a better man. If you're a man and you don't know that then you don't get laid much.
Kibolonia
07-02-2006, 20:34
There's dumb laws everywhere.

*gets to work so America is in the top three porn consumers*
It's like the Solar system. You don't count the sun as a planet. You know what I'm saying?

And in the event that we truly are behind, we should merge with Japan. They'd see Florida coming at it and be like, "OMFG Too buku too buku." But we'd get some liquor in there, put on some Sade, and everyone would have a good time.
Damor
07-02-2006, 20:36
Not much sex, ha? Of course they are. There are other parts on a woman that are sensual besides the breasts and vagina. If you're a woman and you don't know that I feel sorry for you and you need to find a better man. If you're a man and you don't know that then you don't get laid much.I think one of us is confusing sensual (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sensual) with erogenous (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=erogenous).
Kzord
07-02-2006, 20:36
Perhaps they just want to have their own morals? Cut the foolishness with showing your navel and they are simply choosing not to have smut in their country.

You mean they are choosing to deny other citizens of their country the choice of whether or not to view smut.
Utracia
07-02-2006, 20:43
You mean they are choosing to deny other citizens of their country the choice of whether or not to view smut.

Isn't the majority agreed on keeping it out?
New Foxxinnia
07-02-2006, 20:44
I'd like to tour that prison! Meow!
Drunk commies deleted
07-02-2006, 20:47
I'd like to tour that prison! Meow!
Why? I get the feeling the Pornographers and the people who posses porn will be doing the time. That means you'll be touring a prison with a bunch of horny guys.
Zolworld
07-02-2006, 20:48
Isn't the majority agreed on keeping it out?

Who cares what the majority think? if the minority want smut who are they hurting? who cares? its awful when the majority is wrong.
Kzord
07-02-2006, 20:48
Isn't the majority agreed on keeping it out?

If so, then the majority wants to deny a minority of citizens of their country the choice of whether or not to view smut.

Does being in a majority give you the right to absolute power over the minority? Just because I agree with the democratic process, doesn't mean I agree that everything a democratic decision does is automatically right.
Utracia
07-02-2006, 20:51
Who cares what the majority think? if the minority want smut who are they hurting? who cares? its awful when the majority is wrong.

That's what democracy is you know. There is a vote and the majority decides to accept it or not. If the minority always gets what it wants there would be chaos. I also find it amusing to see people take up the 'Right to View Pornography' cause. Can't find something more important, eh?
Damor
07-02-2006, 20:54
Does being in a majority give you the right to absolute power over the minority?In most democracies, yes.
Kzord
07-02-2006, 21:00
That's what democracy is you know. There is a vote and the majority decides to accept it or not. If the minority always gets what it wants there would be chaos. I also find it amusing to see people take up the 'Right to View Pornography' cause. Can't find something more important, eh?
In most democracies, yes.

So, what you're saying is that, if the majority voted to, for example, execute anyone born on a tuesday, then the execution of those people would be ethically right?

I just want to know if that's what you're saying.
PsychoticDan
07-02-2006, 21:00
I think one of us is confusing sensual (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sensual) with erogenous (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=erogenous).
Maybe I'm just overly sexed, but I think it's both. Let me check...

Sensual...
Relating to or affecting any of the senses or a sense organ; sensory.

Of, relating to, given to, or providing gratification of the physical and especially the sexual appetites. See Synonyms at sensuous.
Suggesting sexuality; voluptuous.
Physical rather than spiritual or intellectual.

Erogenous...
Responsive or sensitive to sexual stimulation: erogenous zones.
Arousing sexual desire.

Yep, both. :p
PsychoticDan
07-02-2006, 21:02
Why? I get the feeling the Pornographers and the people who posses porn will be doing the time. That means you'll be touring a prison with a bunch of horny guys.
Actually, if you look at teh way these kinds of laws are enforced in most countries they'll probably jail the women.
Utracia
07-02-2006, 21:04
So, what you're saying is that, if the majority voted to, for example, execute anyone born on a tuesday, then the execution of those people would be ethically right?

I just want to know if that's what you're saying.

Lets try to limit the hyperbole. A democracy is about the majority winning. If you think that sucks and that a minority is also right then perhaps democracy is not right for you and you need to live in anarchy where there are no laws to try to make everyone happy.
Eutrusca
07-02-2006, 21:04
Ahh, good old sex-phobia! It's nice to see that traditional values like shame, self-loathing, and body-hatred are still alive and well.
ROFL! Yeah! Let's hear it for being ashamed of every part of the human body! DISGUSTING! :D
PsychoticDan
07-02-2006, 21:07
That's what democracy is you know. There is a vote and the majority decides to accept it or not. If the minority always gets what it wants there would be chaos. I also find it amusing to see people take up the 'Right to View Pornography' cause. Can't find something more important, eh?
Not sure how they do it in the European democracies, but most democracies protect minorities from the tyrany of the majority. In the US it falls on the Supreme Court. Just because the majority of the people of the country or a state vote a law into existence does not mean it is constitutional. If it infringes on a minoity person's constitutionally protected rights the law will be struck down by the Supreme Court. A perfect example is when california voted to make our state an English only state. The Supreme Court struck down that law because they said it violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment.

It's not all about majorities. A true democracy will balance the will of the majority with the rights of the minority.
Kzord
07-02-2006, 21:07
Lets try to limit the hyperbole. A democracy is about the majority winning. If you think that sucks and that a minority is also right then perhaps democracy is not right for you and you need to live in anarchy where there are no laws to try to make everyone happy.

I may be guilty of hyperbole, but you've simply ignoring what I said and argued against something else. In fact, something I already stated the opposite of.

I said "I agree with the democratic process". That means I think that democratic methods should be followed.

I also said that just because a majority made a decision, it doesn't made it ethically right, and asked if you agreed. You chose to ignore the question and accuse me of being anti-democracy. Frankly, you'll probably ignore what this post said as well, so I won't bother typing anything else.
Utracia
07-02-2006, 21:17
I may be guilty of hyperbole, but you've simply ignoring what I said and argued against something else. In fact, something I already stated the opposite of.

I said "I agree with the democratic process". That means I think that democratic methods should be followed.

I also said that just because a majority made a decision, it doesn't made it ethically right, and asked if you agreed. You chose to ignore the question and accuse me of being anti-democracy. Frankly, you'll probably ignore what this post said as well, so I won't bother typing anything else.

Perhaps you said these things in a previous post but not the one I answered so if I missed it I'm sorry. The only question I saw was that one about executing people born on Tuesdays or something which i figured was rhetorical.

A majority can be oppressive which the US Constitution tries to prevent. But stopping pornography is not oppressive, in my view at least so if Indonesia wants to do it I really don't care.
Kibolonia
07-02-2006, 21:22
Lets try to limit the hyperbole. A democracy is about the majority winning. If you think that sucks and that a minority is also right then perhaps democracy is not right for you and you need to live in anarchy where there are no laws to try to make everyone happy.
You've just discovered why the United States is a Republic! Congratulations, take an octothorp out of petty punctuation.
Kiwi-kiwi
07-02-2006, 21:24
Erogenous...
Responsive or sensitive to sexual stimulation: erogenous zones.
Arousing sexual desire.

Yep, both. :p

Bellybuttons?
Damor
07-02-2006, 21:24
So, what you're saying is that, if the majority voted to, for example, execute anyone born on a tuesday, then the execution of those people would be ethically right?I thought we were talking law, not ethics. And there's a vast difference between the two.
Kevlanakia
07-02-2006, 21:27
Scandinavia is one country, now?

Also, we have great smut.
Damor
07-02-2006, 21:28
Maybe I'm just overly sexed, but I think it's both. Let me check...
<snip>
Yep, both. :pThere's the difference of who is arroused, I think..
'sensual' is arousing to the other, erogenous to the person self.
So I thought the latter fitted better in the context you used. Because it was about pushing the right buttons.
Kzord
07-02-2006, 21:37
I thought we were talking law, not ethics.
I was talking about ethics. Oh well. Haha.

And there's a vast difference between the two.
No kidding!

But stopping pornography is not oppressive, in my view at least so if Indonesia wants to do it I really don't care.

Dictionary says oppressive is defined as "exercising power arbitrarily and often unjustly". Unless you think pornography hurts people, then banning it is pretty arbitrary, and could thus be called oppressive.
The Black Forrest
07-02-2006, 21:42
Hmmm punished?

I guess it would depend on if it's inny or an outy?
New Foxxinnia
07-02-2006, 22:14
Why? I get the feeling the Pornographers and the people who posses porn will be doing the time. That means you'll be touring a prison with a bunch of horny guys.
Oh... Well, I suppose the trip would inform me on how the prison system works and I would be a better person because of it.
Hata-alla
07-02-2006, 22:23
Porn is so subjective. If the Internet has taught us anything, it is that there's a fetish for everything. Feet(Tarantino:rolleyes:), diapers, hair, getting your hair cut(!) and so on, and so forth. To prevent dirty thought over-all you need to ban seeing.
Kevlanakia
07-02-2006, 22:33
Porn is so subjective. If the Internet has taught us anything, it is that there's a fetish for everything. Feet(Tarantino:rolleyes:), diapers, hair, getting your hair cut(!) and so on, and so forth. To prevent dirty thought over-all you need to ban seeing.

And what about people who get aroused by different noises? Full sensory-depravation is the only alternative!
Dark Shadowy Nexus
07-02-2006, 23:44
Naval's are evil. Evil,,,,,
Super-power
07-02-2006, 23:47
Of course they should, considering how erotic the navel is :rolleyes:
Anarchic Conceptions
08-02-2006, 00:37
And what about people who get aroused by different noises? Full sensory-depravation is the only alternative!

Hmm, Skoptsies.

Sounds fun.
PsychoticDan
08-02-2006, 00:40
Bellybuttons?
well, that, too. More the whole area around the belly button though.

Ummmm....:p