Jill, Korean culture used to be quite different with respect to dogs as far as the "pet" association we commonly feel. Don't know if it's still that way as much or not.

And of course the puppy was born, and not a "preborn." Going back to your experiences with the born babies being allowed to die, I don't think there is much disagreement there.

Doug

Doug, my thought is on graphic photos of abortions, wherein so many become angry with the photographer and not the perpetrator. When viewing the puppies photo montage, I doubt anyone becomes angry with the photographer.

How like you to put "crush" porn on your site.

1) The puppy was a sentient being. It suffered. No embryo of fetus suffers when it's wasted.

2) I can't believe you posted porn on your site. Is it for the purient intrest of your more "warped" posters?

Laura, 12:290p: You are projecting. I am by no means bitter. My son suffered due to an immature mother who would sometimes rather party than spend time with him, back in the day.

Posted by: Jill Stanek at January 16, 2008 4:51 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I guess some people don't mind suffering as long as they're entertained. Enjoy the porn.

Boy, Jill, you really are just in this anti-choice movement for the sick thrill of shocking people with disgusting photos, aren't you?

It's always slayed me how animal rights activists expect pro-life advocates to support animal rights yet they won't lift a finger to help the unborn. I joined the animal rights group in college and even became an officer in the organizaton. Yet I could never get any of the members to join the pro-life club and get involved. Completely hypocritical.

Laura,

How do YOU know what crush porn is? Who have you been hangin' out with? Yuck! The whole idea is just sad...and you're right, that is probably what that picture is all about, tho I'd bet a LOT of money that neither Jill nor her "lawyer" knew...

FF

How do you know for a fact no embryo or fetus suffers when "wasted"? There are those who maintain animals suffer no pain as well or their pain is no where near equal to a human's.
How does anyone know for certain what if any pain an unborn child or a born animal suffers?

Guess its all in the point of view, right?

It's always slayed me how animal rights activists expect pro-life advocates to support animal rights yet they won't lift a finger to help the unborn.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It slays me that a woman who practices child neglect and posts crush porn can get her panties in a wad over a frozen zygote.

Oh my gosh, the last thing I expected to see when I looked on this page this morning was crush porn. Sick. I can't believe Jill's posting porn. Should generate some interesting traffic.

I find the images, the participants and the photographers of this type of thing AND bloody abortion photos all equally abhorrent.

Laura,

How do YOU know what crush porn is? Who have you been hangin' out with?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I was an animal control officer and Humane Investigator. As a mandatory reporter, I also used to bust people for child neglect. (Animal abusers and child abusers tend to be the same people. Sociopaths are indifferent to suffering whether it's a puppy or their own child...)

Samantha,

I'm with you that abortion pictures and "crush porn" are equally abhorrent. I'm of the opinion animals suffer pain equal to ours and that we cannot be certain what the unborn suffer and at what point, only that we've been proven wrong time and again concerning the pain capacity of unborn children and premature babies.

I'm certain there are a people who pay good money for this. Totally warped.

FF,

You're certainly right about animal and people abusers. I've heard it said that animal abuse is one of the earliest signs of sociopathy, and was often observed in serial killers as children.

It's looks like this woman with the high-heels was using her right to choose. I don't believe animals have rights in korea. So, I don't really see a problem with this.

Oh thank you so much for again showing us how horrible and unChristian those Asians are. How do you know this woman is South Korean? How do you know these photos are even real? There have been other photos like this on the internet that no one can even prove as real. Where are your sources?

And as far as "Korean culture used to be quite different with respect to dogs as far as the "pet" association we commonly feel.", goes I guess it's their fault they don't have the luxury of keeping these little useless pets and spending hundreds of or even thousands of dollars that they don't have. You could say we are complete barbarians because we eat pork and pigs are just as loving and intelligent as dogs, maybe even more so. Do any of you care what goes on in slaughter houses? Worse then this. And the workers can be treated just as bad. But I bet all you pro-lifers still love your big macs and your pork rinds or whatever.

On that note traditional Asian food does not even contain much meat, if any. It;s only in Asian American food you get the junk-fatty stuff. That probably explains why Asians are as a whole healthier then Westerners who have the benefit of personal trainers and fancy doctors.

Yes it's not really a good day for Jill unless she points out the atrocities of those evil Asians.

Oh, I guess conservatives aren't supposed to demonstrate left-wing hypocrisy. I guess only liberals are allowed to show graphic images. I mean, most have no problem with the proliferation of abhorrent sexual images on the Internet. I guess leftists have free reign to stereotype and bash conservatives like Jill all they want, as this and most threads on this website demonstrates.

Jill is always ranting about how bad pornography is and how it shouldn't be shown especially not where children might see it so yeah it's hypocritical.
Think before you speak. Do a little research first.

I am confused. What is crush porn? The puppy being killed is porn?

Jill -

It seems you got all their panties in a twist with this one.

I do agree with you about the hypocrisy between the "crush porn" (What???? crush porn???? What have we come to????) and the pictures of aborted babies. The person who distributed pictures of the killing of the puppy to educate people about this atrocity is called a hero. The person who distributed the pictures of the killing of a developing human to educate people about this atrocity is called a right-wing nut.

Abortion photos aren't used to educate people but scare them. The person who has these crush porn photos aren't running around hospital or any random place saying "Asian Women Are Murdering Whores".

Thank f**king God.

I would call the distributors of either of these types of images shock-mongerers. I don't see anyone referring to those who share the crush porn pictures heroes, other than Jill. Or am I missing something?

we must remember that the Nazi's liked and cared about dogs too (treated them better than most people). So, we shouldn't be surprized that the pro-aborts they upset over this.

"Animal abusers and child abusers tend to be the same people. "
--------------------
I totally agree for once, man, I never even heard of the term "crush porn" until Laura (FF)posted it.

Didn't she also stated she participated in aborting unborn puppies and didn't see anything wrong with it?

"Abortion photos aren't used to educate people but scare them"
--------------------------------------

Jess,
Were you scared of the abortion photos? Why or Why not?

I have read about how they trained Nazi soldiers. They gave them a puppy to love and care for and nurture. They were then ordered to kill it with their bare hands. They learned to kill people without remorse by desensitizing them.

Samantha -

Your missing something.

Jill didn't go to "crush porn" sites to find these pictures. Read what she wrote.

"While perusing animal rights sites to learn more about ALDF, "

She found these pictures on an animal rights website. Do you think they were on that website for the fun of it? They were there to spark an emotion, to get people mad, to get them to act.

Sound familiar?

Jess -

Abortion photos are used to educate. Many in the Pro-choice crowd still say that in the first trimester of pregnancy the fetus is nothing but a blob of tissue. The abortion photo's prove the ignorance of those people. The photo's also educate by showing people how the developing human being is mutilated in the name of choice.

Read some of the testimony by medical professionals in the Partial Birth Abortion ban act. It is all described there in medical terminology by proffessionals who are under oath.

@ RSD
No I am not scared of the pictures but I probably would be if I was a four year old innocently walking to school and passing one of those trucks with a big four month old dead fetus (real or not) on it.

BTW these photos might not even be real. And no one replied to my other posts. Guess Asians are on a lower peg then fetuses and puppies.

That's so sad :(

@ PIP
What? Abortion, dead puppies, or exploitation of asian females in porn?

Google image "Asian female" and most of its porn.

She found these pictures on an animal rights website. Do you think they were on that website for the fun of it? They were there to spark an emotion, to get people mad, to get them to act.

I guess what confuses me is that I haven't heard anyone explicitly say that they are fine with these porn shots being used to shock, but against the abortion pictures. It's been implied that this is the case by several pro-lifers here, but that's all.

^ That was me. Sorry.

Jill:

I love dogs.

These puppy killing photos are some of the most disgusting I have ever seen. The woman should be found and punished for killing one of God's creatures.

However, what amazes me more is the protest posted by so many of the pro-aborts on this site categorizing them as porn, etc.

It very simple, they cannot handle the truth. We should not be surprised, their acceptance and promotion of abortion is riddle with self-deception and twisting of the the truth. For them to admit the truth would be too humbling and take away too many of their so-called self-rights. Out world is turned upside down.

Abortion is the most vile act against an infant human being that another person can commit. If I can get angry over a puppy being killed by a high heel, just think of the anger and wrath our God in heaven feels when His innocent child is hacked in the womb. And He's infinite, along with His expression of anger, which for now are being withheld in lieu of His inifnite mercy.

Argh. I KNEW I shouldn't have come here today and I did anyway. Must think happy thoughts, must think happy thoughts.

HisMan, you're so right.

The outrage some feel over the exploitation of Asian women and puppies can be compared, for argument's sake, with the outrage others feel about abortion.

For the record, never heard of crush porn before, but it sounds almost as bad as abortion. Both have no RESPECT FOR LIFE.

Very good analogy, Jill. They will never understand though.

The feelings I have when I saw that picture of the puppy being killed above, were very similar to the feelings I have when I see pictures of abortions being performed or babies who have been through abortion. I just feel shock, a sick feeling in my stomach, the urge to cry, and wonder to myself, "Why, oh why??"

Jess,

all of them!

samantha you should post your picture!

What in the world is "crush porn"...or do I even want to know?
How is a puppy being killed "porn"?
You guys who are calling it crush porn...do you (does ANYONE) get sexually aroused by those images?

Bethany,

Apparently so...people get turned on by some freaky stuff.

Well I guess that anything could be labeled porn..even a picture of a foot, or a picture of a balloon, or even a banana, right?

I don't see why calling this series of pictures "porn", when it obviously wasn't intended to be such a thing, makes any sense?

It seems that this is simply a way to avoid discussing the actual point Jill was actually trying to make by posting the pictures....

JMO.

Many different posters appear here, posting at Stanek's site. But, rarely does Stanek respond to the posters. Except one.
Is there anyone at this site who has a good argument against abortion?
To which this poster replied,"No, there is no one here at this site, who has a good argument against abortion, they just think they do".
So what is the reason this poster gets personal attention, praise, from a person running a pro life site, who allows a closed minded pro-abortionist, to post over and over the same talking points. With a zero chance, of thinking one thought, that pro lifers have a good argument against abortion?
Are they related?
Do they know each other outside this site as friends?

how would you even know that woman is of any asian descent? and are you saying that people care more about puppies than they do about human babies? your statements are so illogical and ungrounded that i wonder why people give you so much attention.

Bethany, there's something called Rule #34. It is a rule with very few exceptions.

Did anybody stop and think that maybe whoever was going around looking for strange porn has their priorities messed up? I mean, cattle are gutted alive all the time, among many other meat industry atrocities, but I guess they're not cute enough or in a foreign enough country for you.

"I don't see why calling this series of pictures "porn", when it obviously wasn't intended to be such a thing, makes any sense?"

Well, if you look up the definition of "crush porn" on UrbanDictionary.com...kinda fits. Still, whether or not it's porn doesn't REALLY matter.

woops I just realized that I should probably differentiate myself from the other Anonymous.

Sally, I'm just here for lulz.

Anonymous2 at 12:52,

Anonymous2 is taken by me already. I don't know how many more "A's" there are; I know there were two earlier. Please pick a different name to avoid confusion.

Thanks.

Wow...you learn something new everyday I guess. Today I have learned about "crush porn." I wish I hadn't. People are really disgusting to me at times. This would be one of those times.

:: laughing ::

yllas, do you want us to have a pity-party for you?

Doug

Elizabeth,

I know, right? I think we could all agree that this is a perversion of sex in the extreme...but isn't is possible that a lot more, less obvious things, are also a perversion of this gift of sex?

who allows a closed minded pro-abortionist, to post over and over the same talking points.

Posted by: yllas at January 16, 2008 12:45 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yeah, 'cuz people who say the same thing over and over are FREAKS!

Doug,

What do you say? Is this not objectively wrong either. Is this person's desire to get off sexually all that really matters here? It's not a human that is getting "crushed"...and God knows we have too many unwanted dogs in the world...Where does something like euthanasia in a dog pound fit in with pulverizing it's head with a 10 inch spike? The desire is the same. To kill the dog. And since you don't deal in "intent" just desire, is something like this "okay" in your mind?

Doug, my thought is on graphic photos of abortions, wherein so many become angry with the photographer and not the perpetrator. When viewing the puppies photo montage, I doubt anyone becomes angry with the photographer.

Jill, I don't see much anger towards the photographer, in either case. What have I missed?

I think that seeing gory pictures just grosses a lot of people out, period. For example, if one had young children, would one want them shown those puppy pictures or abortion pictures? Likely not.

It would also be thought of as "horrid pictures" if it was a human baby. And I'm counting on some development for "baby," here - if it was a kidney bean-sized embryo, for example, whether canine or human the impact would not be the same.

Doug

Doug,

That probably came out snotty, but I'm seriously asking...if the result is going to be the same...dead dogs...then would it be wrong to also get sexual pleasure out of doing it a certain way?

Anonymous: Boy, Jill, you really are just in this anti-choice movement for the sick thrill of shocking people with disgusting photos, aren't you?

Oh come on, in no way is she "just in it" for that. Heck, I'm Pro-Choice but don't "like" seeing the puppy pictures or pictures of late-term abortions.

Doug

All that matters is Rule #34 :P

And have you ever considered that the posting of disgusting pictures, while entertaining, don't really have much effect but to rile up the already pro-lifers?

And as far as "Korean culture used to be quite different with respect to dogs as far as the "pet" association we commonly feel.", goes I guess it's their fault they don't have the luxury of keeping these little useless pets and spending hundreds of or even thousands of dollars that they don't have. You could say we are complete barbarians because we eat pork and pigs are just as loving and intelligent as dogs, maybe even more so. Do any of you care what goes on in slaughter houses? Worse then this. And the workers can be treated just as bad. But I bet all you pro-lifers still love your big macs and your pork rinds or whatever.

Jess, very good points. I'm not saying they are "barbarians," just that things are different there than in the US. I've worked with Koreans and it's not a "third-world" country, it's actually very productive and the people have a good standard of living overall compared to most countries in the world.

One brother of mine was stationed at Osan Air Force Base in the 1990s and he said you could walk into a little town and find meat markets with gutted dog carcusses lined up just like hams.

I hear you on the pigs, too. One sister of mine saw "Babe" and never ate pork again.

Doug

I in no way condone brutality to animals, whether it be through neglect, abuse, or someone getting a sick thrill. It sickens me to see such magnificent animals as bears and elephants dancing in tutus and tigers and lions jumping through hoops of fire.

However, what is more brutal to animals than other animals and nature itself?
My cat loves to torment mice before she eats them, alive. She isn't very kind to small rabbits either. The great predators show little mercy as they rip apart another animal, often consuming them while they are still alive.
Animals are at the mercy of nature, meaning cold, heat, disease, drought, quiksand, and water, drowning not being unheard of, as well as other predatory animals.
Animals will destroy and/or eat their own young or the young of another member of their own species. Mother animals must often be on guard against other members of their own species. Mother animals will abandon their young to starve or to the mercy of predators.
You'll also notice animals are not strongly inclined to share their kill with their hungry neighbors, nor is a more powerful animal above coming and stealing another animal's kill for himself, while the poor shmuck who did all the work goes hungry!

@Jess:
"No I am not scared of the pictures but I probably would be if I was a four year old innocently walking to school and passing one of those trucks with a big four month old dead fetus (real or not) on it"
------------------------------
Well, then if no adult gets scared of the abortion pics (except those afraid of the truth) then there is no issue for kids IF the event is used as a "teaching moment"....

"yes, my dear daughter, some mommies love themselves more than their babies so they have their babies killed before they are born"

*it would even be scarier for the kids if their own MOTHER supports this kind of murder.

Mary -

Excellent points. Your points are why we are different from the beasts. We can control our instincts to better our species. As the tiger will steal food and not share, humans will share food and resources with one another. We see atrocities and understand the pain that goes with it. We know to help out when people are starving, being abused or freezing.

Yet, some say we have the right to be just like animals and hump anyone and/or everything we can. No self-control when it comes to being horny. If it feels good do it. Yet, these people are so busy in their self gratification they can't see how this just brings us back to the animal state. Talk about taking a giant leap backwards in evolution.

You talk about how animals eat their young. How is this any different than abortion? Ethologist have theorized that animals eat their young or abandon them because they are sick, or the pack doesn't have enough resources to feed and protect them. Males eat their young because they see them as a threat to their position in the chain of command.

Mary, that's why I don't have huge problems with zoos. Most zoos take good care of their animals and have programs to restore the populations in their natural habitats. As long as they have room health and company it is much better care than they would receive in nature.

Valerie,

Thank you. True about animals eating their young. I also think maternal inexperience is another factor. My poor cat was quite confused with her first litter. She hid one newborn under a chair in the basement on the cold floor, I could only find it by its cry, another she panicked and ran off with and I caught up only because she dropped it. Then she hid the whole darn litter and I couldn't find them anywhere for a few days.

PIP,

I can well remember the days when animals at the zoo were caged. The lions would just pace back and forth and apes would just sit in their cages. This was just brutal. Thank heaven those days are long gone.
Zoos have come a long way and you're right, the animals receive considerably better and more humane care, as well as more natural habitats.

My issue has been the use of wild animals as entertainment in circuses. Totally degrading and unnatural behavior is forced on these animals. Small wonder elephants have gone beserk.

Doug,

That's the first time you have ever not answered one of my questions...did you just miss it?

Mary, total agreement here!

Pornography is a deliberate system of visual erotic stimulation.

Perhaps Jill, like most normal people, isn't so sick as to get turned on by the photos of the puppy being killed, so it didn't occur to her to classify those photos as pornography.

And, perhaps the pro-life community would not feel the need to display graphic abortion images were it not for the media blackout on this. It's curious; they had no qualms about showing images exposing animal or other civil rights abuses; why the silence on this one?!

The object is, in fact, to educate the public as to the humanity of the first victims of abortion and the inhumanity of their victimization. This is necessary because the first step towards any holocaust are the dehumanization of the targeted victims, and the "humanizing" of their destruction. This is easier, of course, if the victims are removed somehow from public view (relocated, or merely where they naturally live prior to birth)...

"Hide it in a hiding place where noone ever goes; put it in your pantry with your cupcakes;
It's a little secret, just the murderers' affair; MOST OF ALL, YOU'VE GOT TO HIDE IT FROM THE KIDS"....

For those crying "sick", "foul", etc. in response to children seeing the abortion graphics WHO ARE NOT JUST CO-OPTING THE INNOCENCE OF THE CHILDREN AS A HUMAN SHIELD FOR YOUR OWN GUILT in the war on the unborn, you can put your fears to rest following these two simple steps:

1.)Explain to the child that some mommies do very evil things to their babies (trust me, the child can see that the victim pictured is a BABY, not a "blob", etc.), but that some other people don't want this to happen to the babies, so they are trying to stop other mommies from killing their babies by showing them that their babies aren't just "clumps of cells", etc.

2.) Realize that while an explanation is due (the real problem, I suspect, behind most of these objections), most children's concerns will be dealt with simply by answering the questions the discovery of any corpse raises (who, when, where, why, how, is justice being served, am I safe, etc.) in an age-appropriate way. Some innocent children, like some guilty adults, are more sensitive than others; but both can not only get over but be better for having seen "those pictures"; what no one ever recovers from is BEING "those pictures."

And yes, it does work. Many babies are alive now who would have been slaughtered (a particularly grisly form of murder) had their mommies not seen "those pictures".

Oh, and I think someone else mentioned Nazis; the Nazis were awfully reluctant for the public to view graphic evidence of their genocidal atrocities, too; but their efforts to suppress that evidence were all done in the name of good taste, not offending other people's sensibilities, etc.

The wrath of God is revealed against ALL who suppress the truth IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS. e.g., I can see objecting to showing gore just for gratuitous effrontery; but suppressing evidence of a holocaust in progress is another thing entirely; then the guilty shoes go on the feet of those who want the pictures suppressed, not those showing them.

Just Thinking,

Very good post!

I was facetious up above, I love dogs. Only a sick bast**** can do something like this. When I traveled to Korea about 10 years ago they did serve dog in resturants.

sick.

Just Thinking -

Awesome post!

Another thought - I was watching a morning news show while my son was getting ready for school. They were giving the local weather than switched to the next story. The War. They showed the remains of a bombing. The pictures were just as gross as abortion pics. I havn't heard anyone complaining about that. I had to explain to my 5 year old son what a suicide bomber is (he heard them say that). The news story with pictures happened so fast I didn't have time to change the channel.

Why can the media show the pictures and/or video's of injured soldiers, bombings, American soldiers being shot by the enemy and bodies laying in pools of blood but not show pictures of the remains of an abortion?

valerie- the media shows much less gore of war than it did a little over 30 years ago. At the time it did incite college students (obviously among others) to begin doing something about it!

just thinking-

aww don't use simon and garfunkel's lyrics for that! :(

PIP,

I couldn't even read the rest of that post after that blashpemy of S&G!

We're supposedly so concerned about our children seeing gore but what about the movies Hollywood puts out. Yes there are age restrictions, but like our dads hiding the Playboy magazines, does anyone think underage kids won't see them?
Some of these movies have been on TV and how can anyone be certain a child won't see them?
I consider them stomach churning, even if they aren't "real". One movie tries to outdo the other in brutality, torture, murder, sadism, and gruesome special effects. I hear little outcry.
Instead we have "experts" assure us our children aren't affected by TV violence. Well, that makes it fine then, right?
But pictures of aborted babies, why that's so traumatic.
The commercials alone that I have seen for some of these movies have been horrific enough. But I suppose children don't watch TV either.

Mary- any R rated movies shown on television are edited for content, or are shown after midnight (as on Comedy Central).

Mary,

there was a law and order episode about that, it starred that chick from cheers, and Shane from Weeds!

samantha,

I KNOW!

Erin,

True, but I have seen those not edited as much as they should have been. There are some I didn't think should have been on TV at all. Also, cable does not always edit and what's to stop children from seeing such movies or shows when mom and dad aren't around or when at a friend's house where maybe mom and dad are more lenient.
We discontinued HBO over 25 years ago, before we even had children, because of the violent and gory content. These were programs children could easily have seen.

Samantha 4:25PM

What are you referring to?

Mary,

The poster re-worded the Simon and Garfunkle song Mrs. Robinson, I guess to make it refer to abortions.

Mary,

Simon and Garfunkel don't deserve to have their god-like lyrics be turned into the description of abortion!

You could use a hard rock song instead and at time may not even have to change the lyrics!

@PiP: Rhea Perlman is the chick from Cheers. Was that the episode that was on last night?

just thinking -> great post.

Yeah, Danny Devito's wife right?

Yeah it was an SVU episode about a kid who raped other children because he saw it on late night cable..it was crazy

Pornography is a deliberate system of visual erotic stimulation.

Perhaps homosexuals, like most normal people, isn't so sick as to get turned on by the photos of heterosexual sex, so it doesn't occur to them to classify those photos as pornography.

And, perhaps the anti-vagina community would not feel the need to display graphic vagina images were it not for the media blackout on this. It's curious; they had no qualms about showing images exposing sexy booty or other erotic images; why the silence on this one?!

The object is, in fact, to educate the public as to the awesomeness of SexyTime. This is necessary because the first step towards any holocaust are the devagination of society, and the "humanizing" of their unsex. This is easier, of course, if the vaginas are removed somehow from public view (relocated, or merely chastity belted)...

"Hide it in a hiding place where noone ever goes; put it in your pantry with your cupcakes;
It's a little secret, just the murderers' affair; MOST OF ALL, YOU'VE GOT TO HIDE IT FROM THE KIDS"....

For those crying "sick", "foul", etc. in response to children seeing the sexy vaginas WHO ARE NOT JUST CO-OPTING THE INNOCENCE OF THE CHILDREN AS A HUMAN SHIELD FOR YOUR OWN GUILT in the war on SexyTime, you can put your fears to rest following these two simple steps:

1.)Explain to the child that every mommy and girl has a vagina (trust me, a coin flip says your kid has one too), but that some other people don't want others to see vaginas, so they are trying to stop other mommies from dropping their panties by showing them that their vaginas aren't horrible.

2.) Realize that while an explanation is due (the real problem, I suspect, behind most of these objections), most children's concerns will be dealt with simply by answering the questions the discovery of any vaginas raises (can i see yours? how big is it?) in an age-appropriate way. Some innocent children, like some guilty adults, are more sensitive than others; but both can not only get over but be better for having seen "those pictures"; what no one ever recovers from is SEXYTIME.

And yes, it does work. Many babies are alive now who would never have been concieved had their mommies not seen "those pictures".

Oh, and I think someone else mentioned Nazis; the Nazis were awfully reluctant for the public to view graphic evidence of their vaginas, too; but their efforts to suppress that evidence were all done in the name of good taste, not offending other people's sensibilities, etc.

The wrath of God is revealed against ALL who suppress the SexyTime IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS. e.g., I can see objecting to showing vaginas just for gratuitous effrontery; but suppressing evidence of SexyTime in progress is another thing entirely; then the guilty shoes go on the feet of those who want the pictures suppressed, not those showing them.

Pornography is a deliberate system of visual erotic stimulation.

....................................................
Websters:
the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction

Eroticism is not necessarily the intended reaction.
Jill has obviously posted a sensationalist piece to invoke an intense reaction of revulsion. It is pornographic. As well as dishonest.

@ jasper
"When I traveled to Korea about 10 years ago they did serve dog in resturants.

sick."

Why is it sick to eat dogs? Because we keep them as pets? I eat no meat, and I think cows are cute. So does that mean eating cows are sick? My cousin keeps chickens as pets, if you eat a chicken, are you sick?
The reason I have such tolerance for people who eat meat is that I know some people need it to survive. And different meat is more available in some areas.
Are you saying, "Better a dead Asian then a dead dog"?

Nah, They don't need cook up Man's best friend to survive Jess.

@jasper
Do people need to eat Babe (the precious little pig) to survive? How about Mary's Little Lamb? What about VEAL? No, the veal probably died from loneliness. And what about Thumper? Bambie needs a best friend.

And Lobsters SCREAM when they get thrown into the boiling hot water.

This little guy like flowers, are you going to eat him for breakfast!?
http://www.oneinchpunch.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/cute_pig01.jpg
They're going to wonder where their Mom went! http://www.osage.net/~themillers92/SCFBlog/07102302.jpg
Do you know what is going to happen to this cow!?
http://www.thedjlinkdomain.co.uk/pictures/cute/cow.jpg
Or this one! http://www.worth1000.com/entries/119500/119579vbDA_w.jpg
What about this!?
http://www.wendellcox.com/images/graphics/wyldencow.jpg

But people can't eat these? http://files.motime.com/d15733a7612022080b12a4325c67d702.jpeg

I just wrote a huge post that would have demonstrated my point but the site wouldn't let me post it and now I lost it.

Jess, I get what you're saying..but I mean..it's a doggie. :(

Anyway, I've always said that I would love to have a farm where cows, pigs, chickens, etc. could live and roam, eat grass, and just exist without being killed. It always makes me sad when my mom makes veal. I just don't think it's necessary to eat a baby cow if there are plenty of adult cows. The babies haven't even gotten to live lol. Any time she makes it I just won't eat it, and my family makes fun of me...but it just makes me sad.

Yep..I am a dork I know.

I know what you're saying but I mean it's a pig with a flower. http://www.oneinchpunch.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/cute_pig01.jpg

This doggie?
http://files.motime.com/d15733a7612022080b12a4325c67d702.jpeg

Speaking of animals, I would show you a picture of my hamster, Sandy, but your head would explode from cute overload.

And think of this before you dig into your next cheeseburger...
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/419jlO39rZL._AA280_.jpg

How could you say eating THAT isn't cruel?

What makes people "choose" to hurt a puppy?

Jess,
Why do you take God's name in vain?

That's the first time you have ever not answered one of my questions...did you just miss it?

Yeah, MK.
......

What do you say? Is this not objectively wrong either.

No - any feeling of "wrong," regardless of how prevalent, is still the subjective perception of sentient minds. A thing will exist, or not, and an action occur, or not, and for any good/bad/right/wrong in the moral realm to be felt about it there has to be "somebody" making valuations in the first place.
......

Is this person's desire to get off sexually all that really matters here?

I don't know if that's the intent of the act or pictures, but no, of course I don't say that. There's a definite "Yuck" factor in it for me. I don't look at it as "this person's desire," in a vacuum, in the first place. I still question just why the pictures were made, and feel like, "Now who would want to see that?" Same as for seeing bloody and messy abortion pictures.
......

It's not a human that is getting "crushed"...and God knows we have too many unwanted dogs in the world...Where does something like euthanasia in a dog pound fit in with pulverizing it's head with a 10 inch spike? The desire is the same. To kill the dog. And since you don't deal in "intent" just desire, is something like this "okay" in your mind?

Intent comes from desire. Intent is an expression of desire. We all deal with them all the time. You're right - dogs are killed frequently, but I don't think that puppy was killed for the same reason as many dogs are killed in pounds, veterinary clinics, etc. No, I don't think it's okay - I don't see a good enough reason to do this.
......

That probably came out snotty, but I'm seriously asking...if the result is going to be the same...dead dogs...then would it be wrong to also get sexual pleasure out of doing it a certain way?

The result being the same in no way means it will be seen the same, just as Jane Doe having an unwanted pregnancy and having a doctor perform an abortion won't affect many people the same as would Joe Blow breaking into Jane's house, where she was gestating a wanted pregnancy, attacking her and killing the fetus. Intent, etc., certainly mattersm to most people.

If the reason that puppies are killed is for people to get sexual pleasure, then I feel that is wrong. Yes, sometimes dogs are killed, and I think in some situations that is for the best, but if it's for the sake of making such pictures, then "not okay" in my book, same as are making torture films, "snuff" films, etc., using people.

Lol Jess...sometimes you crack me up..that kid is super cute in the cow costume.

*wince* Lobsters don't actually scream. They don't have the ability to scream. That's steam escaping from their shells. It works very much like a tea kettle making noise when it's boiling.

@truthseeker
When did I take God's name in vain?

http://www.dropline.net/cats/kitty/soviet_korea

Blasphemy? Sorry, I don't equate S&G with God. I altered one word of the original S&G lyric because, while I know of at least one person named "Robinson" who is actively involved in killing the unborn, I did not want to tar all Robinsons with that same brush; murder, not people named Robinson, are the obvious focus.

"Blank", you have no evidence to support your insipid, cheap, puerile, and actually blasphemous mockery of the truth you are too big a coward to face. I have plenty of evidence to back up my original post. How about instead of screwing up, try growing up. Who knows, the sheer novelty of the experience may just give your brain the boost it so desperately needs to produce anything legitimate.

Since your (com)post obviously didn't intend to serve any purpose other than to offend and mock, I think it should be deleted. NOW. It's not as though we need any more examples of the gratuitous indecency so typical of pro-child murderers.