by Starmaster » October 8th, 2009, 5:24 am
MN_FriendlyGuy: I have to say that I am very disappointed by your response. andy546 was not asking how to perform the things he was talking about, but instead seeking information on what the deliterious effects of them were. To use your analogy, he was not saying that he was going to buy alcohol for minors, or even advocating it, but instead wanted to write an essay on the harmful effects of it, and hence wanted to know what they were. Now what is wrong with that? Sure we may all know that murder is wrong, but not all of our laws are so clearly moral (in fact many people do in fact advocate murder in certain circumstances, such as capital punishment, euthanasia, or abortion). No society is perfect, and neither is ours. Ideally any society should strive to become so however, to seek improvement. Before one can improve, one needs to identify the areas for improvement, and in order to do that, people need to be able to talk about the subject in a calm and rational manner, without undue emotion seeking to squash the discussion. I'm sure that at one time (not that long ago in fact) a similar question concerning homosexuals would have elicited a very similar response from most people to that which you posted, however that kind of response hardly contributes to the advancement of rights for homosexuals. If you don't like that example, try instead the rights for women, or people of other races or religions. Please note that I am not necessarily advocating anything here, but instead just the calm, and reasoned discourse between people on any topic. The moment any topic becomes taboo, reasoned discourse becomes impossible, and therefor progress as well. Sure, perhaps no progress truly needs to be made in some areas, but unless we are able to talk about it with clear heads, how will we know for sure the difference between a topic that legitimately gets us angry, and one that merely enforces harmful stereotypes and discrimination like has happened with women, black people, Jews, or whatever, in the past? If something really is bad, then there will be a logical reason for it, and that should be enough for anyone. If someone like andy546 comes along asking what that reason may be, then it will do him and everyone far better if you can give him that logical reason rather than invoking an angry response, and comparing the topic with "evil". As you can see from the other responses so far, no one disputes the legality of this situation here, but there are already different opinions as to what the harmful effects of these files on teens actually are. Thus, I think that calm, and rational discussion of the topic is well in order. I'm not telling you or anyone not to have feelings on this or any subject, but please don't let it get in the way of dealing with this (or any situation) rationally.
A similar message goes to zapnosis, who while you didn't attack andy nearly as hard as Friendlyguy did, your "shock" to the subject apparently confused your interpretation of andy's intentions, which I will reiterate was to discuss the topic, not to advocate it, or admit to having supported it. Again, I do not think that any topic should be automatically closed for discussion. If the answer is that clear for everyone, then it will be a short discussion anyway. If it is not that clear, then evidently some discussion about it needs to take place. Since there is obviously some disagreement here on the issue, then discussion is very appropriate and andy should not be attacked nor ridiculed for his attempt to discover the facts of the situation. Like I said, he will be far better served by giving him the correct information (as best as you know it anyway), than by any sort of personal attack or ridicule.
Anyway, that's my "opinion" on this.