One Pornographic Image Per Nigerian Child

   
   
   
   
   

While I've discounted the OLPC child pornography fears of others and we've explored adult OLPC XO uses, I haven't spoken about the potent mix of Internet access and the natural curiosity of children, especially those reaching puberty, to go looking for images others may not want them to see.

Of course, the worst kept secret for any telecenter or cybercafe is what happens when you mix Internet access and young men: porn. I've seen whole computer rooms turn into porno galleries as boobie-gazing men replace women and children as the primary customers of a center. Yes, its sad, but its also human nature.

And human nature just bit One Laptop Per Child on its naked ass, according to Reuters Africa:

olpc games
Check it out! They are "XO-ing"!
Nigerian schoolchildren who received laptops from a U.S. aid organisation have used them to explore pornographic sites on the Internet, the official News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reported on Thursday. NAN said its reporter had seen pornographic images stored on several of the children's laptops.

"Efforts to promote learning with laptops in a primary school in Abuja have gone awry as the pupils freely browse adult sites with explicit sexual materials," NAN said.

Now I am not surprised that teenagers or even younger were getting a eyeful of "hot coffee" through WiFi mesh networking, exploring a whole new medical OLPC application, I can even see little XO icons grouping around navigators with the best "money shot" angles, I am only surprised that the NAN reporter wrote about it.

Usually, everyone glosses over the issue, like the New York Times did. To focus on it this much means that the reporter really wanted a headline grabbing story or is against the project on a personal level.

No matter which, OLPC Nigeria reacted quickly and XO computers will now be fitted with filters. No word on exactly how those very filters will work since even lazy Americans have found multiple ways around them. Porn surfing is not a technical problem to be solved with filters, it's a human nature issue addressed through a comprehensive cultural integration process.

Related Entries

44 Comments

'Nigerian schoolchildren who received laptops from a U.S. aid organisation have used them to explore pornographic sites on the Internet'

Isn't it funny how things come full circle.
I think back on those National Geographic magazines under my bed with pictures of bare breasted African women.

Its truly a wonderful World we live in...and young men will always remain the same.

You can restrict access to porn through the Internet access point. You could use a "net nanny" service to blacklist certain websites. Unfortunately that blacklist keeps growing. It comes down to parents. Growing up in the US, I had cable TV. Those cable Tv channels included adult content. The only thing that kept me from accessing adult content was incredible fear of parental discipline. A combination parental discipline and proxy server filtering software will be what keeps kids from accessing inappropriate materials on the Internet.

A greater question is, what about kids viewing violent material or websites that advocate violence. In my mind, that material is much more dangerous.

Then there is the question of protecting kids from "political information" that criticizes their government, and about sensitive subjects such as abortion, HIV/AIDS, homosexuality, etc.

Maybe opening the floodgates isn't so bad after all?

"Its truly a wonderful World we live in...and young men will always remain the same."

Undoubtedly, there will have been a culture and religion in human history that has NOT tried to deny this aspect of young people (men and women). But I have never heard of it. Even the free world has restrictions on TV and radio broadcasts "to protect the children" (against what is unclear to me).

On the contrary, even many living cultures literally rather kill their children than accept their feelings.

However, filtering will not be that difficult. The mesh network in Nigeria will have only a few access points to the internet. They will just use white-listing which incorporates the ultimate in censorship. It even blocks Tor, the ultimate filter killer. This IS an education project.

White listing is very effective (and restrictive), until the children find out about sharing pictures and films, that is.

Winter

White Listing works but it would also keep children and adults from interacting w/ the larger world. White listing is a great means of social control.

"White listing is a great means of social control."

I once heard that processing recycled paper from the West was big bussiness in Bangladesh. They stopped it, because (as they said to the reported) it sometimes contained pornographic magazins.

There really are people who would rather murder a child than let it see a naked body of the opposite sex. For these people, cultural isolation and extensive censorship come naturally.

It is sad to say, but in northern Nigeria, the concentration of such people is rather uncomfortably high.

Winter

Winter has a point. Unfortunately, censorship too often means protecting children from material that is "titillating" rather than material that "disturbs" their sense of wrong and right.

Shouldn't it be more important to expose children and the greater populace to information that makes them question their existing paradigm?

While the libertarian take on this issue is valid, and the presence of pornography in the hands of kids is not a surprise, it is necessary to consider the realities on the ground.

Politically, in many different countries, it would be terrible both the actual presence of porn and some of the responses drafted here. When Winter says "in northern Nigeria, the concentration of such people is rather uncomfortably high." he may be stating a perfectly acceptable opinion in the context of the group that gathers around Wayan's watering hole, but at the same time he is basically condemning the "official" outlook to life and morality, prevalent in Nigeria and in many other OLPC's target countries.

This is not political correctness, it's political reality. For many communities, one good reason NOT to give every child a computer is because he or she may start question authority, being sexual, ethical, political or plain cultural authority. We in the West may think that's good but many in the West and certainly all around the world do not.

Why I bring this up? Because it may be an issue for those promoting the XO. Bringing porn to the masses is inevitable, it may not be stoppable, and it may be a reason for many to start fighting against the plan for a computer for everybody. How to confront this? I have no idea.

The article mentions that the computers themselves will be fitted with filters. So, can you press the view-source key, disable the filter and at the same time get a great list of websites to visit for porn? Or will it do keyword filtering, which has always ended up blocking more breast cancer discussion boards than pictures of breasts? This is a societal issue that parents and teachers will need to address. Technological solutions will either fail miserably or be so draconian in nature that the laptop's original openness is lost. Score another one for the need of an implementation plan.

Jon,

"The article mentions that the computers themselves will be fitted with filters.So, can you press the view-source key, disable the filter and at the same time get a great list of websites to visit for porn?"

That is true. Some have mentioned filtering at the server. However, anyone with a little ingenuity can get around this, as Winter points out.

The only good solution is for parents to talk with children and explain why viewing pornograpy is a bad idea.

"When Winter says "in northern Nigeria, the concentration of such people is rather uncomfortably high." he may be stating a perfectly acceptable opinion in the context of the group that gathers around Wayan's watering hole, but at the same time he is basically condemning the "official" outlook to life and morality, prevalent in Nigeria and in many other OLPC's target countries."

I was referring to people who would rather kill a child (girl) than let her look a a naked body. People who would murder raped women.


Winter

EVM,

Pornography on the OLPC XO is a very strong reason for developing world countries to fight against one computer for every child. In fact, I can see it being a rally cry against any technology in education. Or let's look at a society that has a conflicted relationship with sex and yet has a long history with Internet usage: the United States.

What do we find? Teachers being railroaded to jail because of accidental porn in the classroom: http://www.boingboing.net/2007/02/14/teacher_faces_jail_t.html

In many countries,as Winter points out, a teacher or student found to have pornography in their possession, be they the ones who downloaded it or not, would be beaten, ostracized, or worse by their society.

Funny... wouldn't it have been just a little prudent to have some sort of STANDARDS!!! Donated PC's that no one bothered to check (or wipe clean and install a "kid-friendly" OS and I'net tools) ... Ohh yeah and some sort of supervivion!

And anyway, when did anyone really care about poor kids in Africa (besides a select few), until a few rich actors decided to use it as a place to gain publicity for adopting maybe one or two (really makes a dent, Brad and Angie!) children who are for more deserved of the publicity than the aforementioned as well as a few high profile spoiled brats who aren't worthy of keystrokes here?

And just like the westerners we are, lets throw a few computers (common, $100 a pop? I have trouble making my frickin' rent! And not very practical to "boot") at the symptom and not invest some human capital at the problem ...

No apologies , just words from an african-american male single-parent struggling to figure out why this is "news" instead of addressing (and answering) the really complex questions in all of this.... makes Rodney King seem like a prophet ... it's about getting along. Anything else is self-serving at best.

"Pornography on the OLPC XO is a very strong reason for developing world countries to fight against one computer for every child."

Religious zeal has only rarely lead to good education.

Rob

Wayan, I agree with you, it is a problem. Also, there's little hope for an actual solution.

Rob: yes, your observation may be right. But again, where's the solution to this?

From the OLPC Wiki:

The School server can be used for content filtering; the extent to which it will be is based upon a country-by-country decision. In regard to the children being exploited in the creation of pornographic content, it is certainly a concern, one we are trying to address through a number of mechanism, some technological, but most of a societal nature.

The camera and microphone are hardwired to LEDs and are protected against remote access (See BitFrost for details). The Journal logs all activities, including picture-taking. But neither of these measures is adequate if the family and community turn their backs on their children.

We are striving to engage all community members in the program, which includes guidance about the exploitation of children. --Walter 11:40, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Ask_OLPC_a_Question#Preventing_Porn.2FAdult_Content.3F

"In regard to the children being exploited in the creation of pornographic content, it is certainly a concern, one we are trying to address through a number of mechanism, some technological, but most of a societal nature."

I understood that the children are NOT anonymous on the networks. That would secure a lot of avenues of attack.

Each XO is traceable in communication. You cannot use an XO for impersonating another one, as they seem to cryptographically sign their communications. I am not sure to what extend communications can be traced.

Winter

I can't believe that *anyone* would be dumb enough to send PC's to Nigeria - as an act of charity, no less. Has it occurred to the great minds behind this initiative that Nigeria is the online fraud capital of the world? Millions of Nigerians steal billions of dollars from naive, good natured people - often using the names of fake charities - but I guess that particular irony is lost on you.
Would you walk up to a bank robber and hand him a gun and a mask? Apparently you would.

Jared, a fool and their money are soon parted. And funny enough, fools, and those who take from them, exist everywhere, even in the USA.

Online fraud is not a Nigerian problem, its a human nature problem. There were flim-flam men fleecing folks back before electricity, and there will be con artists long after we are all in the Matrix.

Next time, don't believe a get-rich-quick scheme, be it online or off.

In the cloying atmosphere of political correctness that has a choke-hold on modern society, I can understand the assertion that online fraud isn't "a Nigerian problem." But speaking as someone that has studied this for 3 years, I can tell you that it is 99 % a Nigerian problem and 1 % a Romanian problem. What fools a lot of people is a reliance on a simple IP trace showing that plenty of fraudulent emails originate from countries other than Nigeria... However, the people behind these emails are Nigerian Ex-pats in 99 % of cases. [It's only recently that Romanians have started to move in on their turf.] The sooner the world wakes up to the international nature of Nigerian organised crime, the sooner we can get serious about beating it.

What a rotten idea. The internet isn't a god-given right you know. They would be much better off without ever seeing a computer or the internet. Learning how to make money and look at porn isn't what they need, if you leave them alone, at least they might turn out to be decent, happy people. Unfortunately, we've just figured out how to turn the rest of the world's children into mentally corrupted scumbags like American kids (and adults). Great job!

"if you leave them alone, at least they might turn out to be decent, happy people."

No, if you leave children alone, they will turn out to be ignorant adults.

There are very good reasons that education is one of the rights of children in the UN declarations:

http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/UN-declaration/

The child is entitled to receive education, which shall be free and compulsory, at least in the elementary stages. He shall be given an education which will promote his general culture and enable him, on a basis of equal opportunity, to develop his abilities, his individual judgement, and his sense of moral and social responsibility, and to become a useful member of society.

Winter

"No, if you leave children alone, they will turn out to be ignorant adults."

There are many 'ignorant adults' that are way better people than you or I. Education is NOT more important than character, and if you must destroy someone's innocence/goodness to educate them, then they are better off uneducated. I agree with most of the U.N.'s statements on child development, but they are not God, and their opinion is no better than mine. Although some education is necessary, why is it that the most educated societies in the world are also the most immoral? Do you care about that? Probably not. Apparently, most people are too politically correct and/or unbelieving nowadays to say it, but teaching them about God is way more important than giving them 24/7 porn access. Maybe they should be distributing Bibles to help the children become saved rather than corrupting their minds. I'm sure the atheists and Christian-bashers will jump all over me for speaking the truth, but oh well. The internet is not necessary to be educated, only over-educated.

"teaching them about God is way more important than giving them 24/7 porn access"

You could send them a pedophile priest while you are at it. Teaching about God doesn't guarantee results any more than handing kids a laptop does.

Education is a tool. Like a hammer. It can be used to fix things or break things. The kids could live without it but they might live much better with it. The part faith plays in this is the faith that in the long run kids will be helped more by being able to explore, learn and think than they will be hurt by being exposed to boobies, scams and bigotry.

"You could send them a pedophile priest while you are at it."

Sending them a perverted priest is the exact opposite of sending them a Bible. A pedophile priest is not a Christian, and if he read his Bible more instead of looking at porn, he probably would not be a pedophile.

"The part faith plays in this is the faith that in the long run kids will be helped more by being able to explore, learn and think than they will be hurt by being exposed to boobies, scams and bigotry."

That is exactly my point, except the opposite. I have a lot of faith that they will be hurt more than they are helped. No child (or unwilling adult for that matter) should be exposed to that, and it is much more than just a few 'boobies' and spam. The internet is very helpful, but not more than it is harmful overall, and it is definitely not a necessity of life or education.

Jason, I could not disagree with you more that the internet is more harmful than helpful. And I am well aware of how harmful it can be.
I honestly doubt the grand vision of olpc will ever be realized. Nor do I think that XO will ever be the undoing of Wintel. But I do believe that people reaching out to help other people is a good thing. I believe in a liberal arts education and that things always happen in unexpected ways. I believe that a few of these laptops will inspire some kids somewhere to reach farther than they might otherwise have. A few kids will learn something that makes a positive difference in their lives that otherwise would not have happened. There might even be enough of that to make the monetary expense worth while. I think that there is enough neat technology in XO that we will see bits of it around us for years to come.
The necessity of life or education is to not put blinders on. Have faith that when the kids open their eyes and minds, the spirit of the true God will be there for them to see.

"There are many 'ignorant adults' that are way better people than you or I. Education is NOT more important than character, and if you must destroy someone's innocence/goodness to educate them, then they are better off uneducated."

This problem has been discussed ad-nauseatem by Plato (and Socrates). There is ample opportunity to read up on this subject. You can find Plato's work on Project Gutenberg.

However, I loath the theory that ignorance is a protection for children and adults. Ignorance doesn't protect, it kills. That is why ignorance is actively promoted by the worst of tirans.

Winter

"Jason, I could not disagree with you more that the internet is more harmful than helpful. And I am well aware of how harmful it can be."

I couldn't disagree more with you also. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I just don't think we should force (y)our view of 'education' down other peoples' throats, especially if they're not already screwed up as bad as we are (morally, not financially). I have friends in several third world countries, and while I know there are exceptions, overall and by far, they are less educated but better people than all of my American friends.

"I loath the theory that ignorance is a protection for children and adults. Ignorance doesn't protect, it kills. That is why ignorance is actively promoted by the worst of tirans."

Ignorance about the specifics of evil is a great thing, not a bad thing, and it can protect more than it kills, if it is the good kind of ignorance (naivity), not hatred. Ignorance/hatred may be promoted by tyrants, but the love of 'education' over spirituality is the reason we are so morally bankrupt. Legal jargon is obsessed over, while basic morality is becoming ever harder to find. Do you prefer your children to have degrees in (e.g.) liberal arts, know everything about the world and be evil, or be naive, kind, gentle people that will influence others for the better and go to heaven one day? I assume you do not believe in heaven because you are very 'educated', but I do, and by reading the Bible, I'm very sure which one God prefers, and I will take his side over anybody's, no matter how unpopular my views may be here or anywhere else.

"the love of 'education' over spirituality is the reason we are so morally bankrupt"

Sorry but this is nonsense. Education and spirituality are not mutually exclusive - note many a scientists (in physics especially) who, in fact, become 'spiritual' after reaching 'boundaries' (with its many paradoxes) of science.

"Do you prefer your children to have degrees in (e.g.) liberal arts, know everything about the world and be evil, or be naive, kind, gentle people ..."

Being 'naive' is not the same as being 'kind and gentle' - ignorance very often, directly or indirectly, leads to 'evil'. The 'Bible belt's ' support for Bush's war in Iraq (with hundreds of thousand's dead as a result) is a good example of that.

"...that will influence others for the better and go to heaven one day?"

How on earth (pardon the pun :) we're discussing 'heaven' here :? I'm quite surprised that, with you views, you somehow managed not only to get access to a computer but also fund this website - wouldn't a Bible alone and staying 'naive' be enough...

Sorry for being harsh but I do think your type of post is really misplaced on this website.

"Sorry but this is nonsense. Education and spirituality are not mutually exclusive - note many a scientists (in physics especially) who, in fact, become 'spiritual' after reaching 'boundaries' (with its many paradoxes) of science."

They are not totally mutually exclusive, but they are largely mutually exclusive. Oh yeah, and there are plenty of spiritual scientists walking around...

"Being 'naive' is not the same as being 'kind and gentle' - ignorance very often, directly or indirectly, leads to 'evil'. The 'Bible belt's ' support for Bush's war in Iraq (with hundreds of thousand's dead as a result) is a good example of that."

Actually, being 'naive' often goes hand-in-hand with being kind and gentle, and while people in the Bible Belt may be naive compared to the kind of people you associate with, they are by no means naive in the way I'm referring to, so your comparison is a very innaccurate one.

"How on earth (pardon the pun :) we're discussing 'heaven' here :? I'm quite surprised that, with you views, you somehow managed not only to get access to a computer but also fund this website - wouldn't a Bible alone and staying 'naive' be enough...

Sorry for being harsh but I do think your type of post is really misplaced on this website."

Sadly, I'm one of the people that has already been corrupted by the internet, but at least I can speak up for those that haven't been yet, and my belief and your unbelief in heaven does not make me ignorant, nor does it make you educated, quite the opposite.

I'm so sorry for daring to disagree with your superior all-knowing point-of-view. Thanks for enlightening me with your 'education'.

Well this certainly has the feeling of a battle that's been fought and re-fought.

I'm not going to take a side on this other then to point out that, like every other technical advancement the Internet has good and bad aspects to it and the other thing it has in common with every other technological advancement is that there's no stuffing it back into the bottle.

The Internet's here and if you've got misgivings you'd better either follow the example of the Amish or find some way to cope. I'd rather find some way to cope since the history of technology shows that, while it extracts a fearful price it also confers awesome blessings. Since there's never been a time in human history when so large a percentage of the human race has lived as well or had so much hope for the future it's clear the blessings easily outweigh the price.

"Since there's never been a time in human history when so large a percentage of the human race has lived as well or had so much hope for the future it's clear the blessings easily outweigh the price."

I agree with you that a larger percentage of the human race is financially better off and has better access to healthcare, but most of that doesn't have anything to do with the internet. I'm not saying that all education is bad, I'm referring to the internet in it's current form.

"Sadly, I'm one of the people that has already been corrupted by the internet, but at least I can speak up for those that haven't been yet, and my belief and your unbelief in heaven does not make me ignorant, nor does it make you educated, quite the opposite."

Corrupted? In what way.

There are people who loath the human body and despise of even a picture of Michelangelo's David or a uncovered baby Jesus getting fed by Maria (in full view). These were extremely popular icons in the most pietous medieval communities, created by the greatest of artists humankind has seen. Others loathed Galieleo's, Copernicus', and Darwin's writings. I can indeed see that such people would also loath the internet because they cannot censor it.

If you think you can "protect" people by keeping them ignorant (which is the relevant connotation of Naive here), you are thinking like those despised missionaries who destroyed, and are still destroying, indigenious cultures all over the world. It was a priest who destroyed almost all of central America's writing history.

Anyhow, the Huns and Mongols were naive to. And they were not very kind.

And please, at least read Plato before you start presenting opinions that were already convincingly refuted by Socrates (~450 BC). But that is the price of naivety: Not knowing what you are doing.

Winter

"Corrupted? In what way."

Because I've seen many bad things that have helped to pollute and damage my mind while using the internet, as I'm sure everyone else here has also.

"There are people who loath the human body and despise of even a picture of Michelangelo's David or a uncovered baby Jesus getting fed by Maria (in full view). These were extremely popular icons in the most pietous medieval communities, created by the greatest of artists humankind has seen."

I love the human body, I definitely do not loathe it, but public nudity is wrong, period, including videos, photos, statues and paintings, regardless of who created them. I don't know of anyone that is offended by people wearing clothing, but there are many that are offended by people not wearing them, and if you don't care who you offend, you are arrogant as well as wrong.

For real Christians, the Bible makes it very clear that modest clothing and actions are the only choice, so the 'pietous' communities that you refer to are not truly Christian, and are irrelevant in that respect.

"Others loathed Galieleo's, Copernicus', and Darwin's writings. I can indeed see that such people would also loath the internet because they cannot censor it."

I have no problem with writings that do not contradict God, but I do not believe in Darwin's mistaken theories as they obviously do. Anything that causes people to be tricked into losing their soul should be censored. That being said, internet porn is way more visible and offensive to most people than Darwin's writings.

"If you think you can "protect" people by keeping them ignorant (which is the relevant connotation of Naive here), you are thinking like those despised missionaries who destroyed, and are still destroying, indigenious cultures all over the world. It was a priest who destroyed almost all of central America's writing history."

'Ignorance' can be a good or a bad thing, depending on what kind of ignorance it is. The naive, innocent 'ignorance' of many third world people is a good thing, while the arrogant, atheistic ignorance that you are so proud of is not.

I love the various indigenious cultures of the world, which your beloved internet is helping to destroy so quickly. Teaching them how to save their souls and dress a little more modestly may alter their culture somewhat, but for the better, and it will not alter their culture nearly as much as becoming web/porn addicts, and I would never advocate destoying their writings.

"Anyhow, the Huns and Mongols were naive to. And they were not very kind."

By naive, I meant naive and kind. People that are not kind should be taught to be more kind.

"And please, at least read Plato before you start presenting opinions that were already convincingly refuted by Socrates (~450 BC). But that is the price of naivety: Not knowing what you are doing."

I could care less about Plato or Socrates' opinion on porn. Were they Christian? No. Were they smarter than God? No. Are you smarter than God? No. Case closed.

I will not go into detail into your complete comment. Short to say that you simply discard most of humanity as moraly depraved. Only Victorians and certain USA citizens seem to qualify.

The fact that you seem to set standards on your thoughts and emotions you cannot live up to, seems to indicate you have personal problems. Projecting them on others won't help solving them. It just makes me think of that old saying: "Puritanism is the haunting fear that someone somewhere might be happy"

You write:
"I love the human body, I definitely do not loathe it, but public nudity is wrong, period, including videos, photos, statues and paintings, regardless of who created them."

Concentrating on this revealing quote. What is considered reprehensible public exposure varies considerably over time and space. Accusing European, Balinese, or other women of moral depravity because they appear in public in what YOU think is incomplete dress is just bigottery.

Claiming Michelangelo's David promotes harmful moral decline is just incredibly funnie and sad at the same time. This also holds for a large part of human art and literature, and most of human pasttime. Might I just say that other people have enough problems of their own, they don't need your (moral) problems added?

In short, I don't think your views will be helpful in educating the children of the world.

Winter

"Short to say that you simply discard most of humanity as moraly depraved. Only Victorians and certain USA citizens seem to qualify."

Most of humanity IS morally depraved to some extent, obviously including yourself, which is exactly is why we should not influence those that are not so corrupted to become that way also, and I do not think Victorians or any USA citizens are more principled than anyone else. How you twisted that out of what I said, I do not know.

"The fact that you seem to set standards on your thoughts and emotions you cannot live up to, seems to indicate you have personal problems. Projecting them on others won't help solving them. It just makes me think of that old saying: "Puritanism is the haunting fear that someone somewhere might be happy""

We should all strive to be very good, moral people, and that IS realistic for many, even if it is hard to believe for you and your associates. Most 'uneducated' people in undeveloped countries are happier than you appear to be, and your desire to destroy that seems to indicate that it is you that has the personal problems.

"You write:
"I love the human body, I definitely do not loathe it, but public nudity is wrong, period, including videos, photos, statues and paintings, regardless of who created them."

Concentrating on this revealing quote. What is considered reprehensible public exposure varies considerably over time and space. Accusing European, Balinese, or other women of moral depravity because they appear in public in what YOU think is incomplete dress is just bigottery."

Do you think that it would be okay for a woman to walk through the streets of Riyadh in a bikini? Probably, and that is because unbelievers like yourself are never concerned when you offend religious people, you are only concerned when religious people offend you. That is the real bigotry.

"Claiming Michelangelo's David promotes harmful moral decline is just incredibly funnie and sad at the same time. This also holds for a large part of human art and literature, and most of human pasttime. Might I just say that other people have enough problems of their own, they don't need your (moral) problems added?"

The problems of today do not stem from morality, it is your evil way of thinking that has become everyone's problem. It is ironic that you try to make me sound so self-righteous when it is you and those that believe like you that are always the loudest better-than-thou voices in the room. You may laugh at God now, but if you do not have a change of heart, you might not think it is so funny when the time comes for you to explain yourself to him. The Bible praises naivity, and YOU are no one to overrule God.

"Do you think that it would be okay for a woman to walk through the streets of Riyadh in a bikini? Probably, and that is because unbelievers like yourself are never concerned when you offend religious people, you are only concerned when religious people offend you. That is the real bigotry."

I think this discussion has gone way beyond the point of usefulness. I would only like to inform you that using a one of the most oppressing and inhumane regimes in the world towards women, the Saudies, as an example of "moral" behavior has only strengthened my resolve. If you feel you morals have anything in common with the Wahabits, we don't share a common ground for discussion.

Furthermore, I do not see any place where I showed contempt towards religion or religious people. But I feel that I have a right to defend women and man you accuse of being morally depraved just because they don't dress or depict bodies like you want to.

Winter

"I would only like to inform you that using a one of the most oppressing and inhumane regimes in the world towards women, the Saudies, as an example of "moral" behavior has only strengthened my resolve. If you feel you morals have anything in common with the Wahabits, we don't share a common ground for discussion."

I don't agree with everything they do because I am not a muslim, but I do respect them for their strong morality, even if it is sometimes too harsh, and once again, what makes your lack of religion superior to their convictions?

"Furthermore, I do not see any place where I showed contempt towards religion or religious people. But I feel that I have a right to defend women and man you accuse of being morally depraved just because they don't dress or depict bodies like you want to."

I think you've made it blatantly clear in your comments how much respect you have for Christians', and now Muslims' beliefs, and if you and your peers want to live in a giant atheistic cesspool somewhere, that is your right, but my only point is that you shouldn't try to drag the rest of the world down with you.

"I don't agree with everything they do because I am not a muslim, but I do respect them for their strong morality, even if it is sometimes too harsh, and once again, what makes your lack of religion superior to their convictions?"

I am sorry to say so, but as I said before, I do not see any use in discussing morality with someone who admires the "moralistic" human and women's rights abuses of the absolute rulers of Saudi Arabia. Abuses abhored too by most humans, whatever their religion or absence thereof.

For those readers who wonder what I mean, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/23/60minutes/main682565.shtml

Winter

"I do not see any use in discussing morality with someone who admires the "moralistic" human and women's rights abuses of the absolute rulers of Saudi Arabia. Abuses abhored too by most humans, whatever their religion or absence thereof."

I do not see any use in discussing it further with you also. The links that you provided are somewhat biased, but I do not agree with everything they do, however, I believe it is their culture and I respect their choice, and their beliefs seem at least as reasonable as yours. But since YOU disagree with them, everything they do MUST be wrong, right?

Jason, what is your conviction?
First, understand this:
I see one thing that "Winter" did: understating. It's not just Plato, Da Vinci, whoever etc. It's also several Africans & third world dwellers being criminalized by an anti-nude ideology. Think of... I'll just throw in the name Philetus as some fictional Christian in poverty; it's a ball-park representation of Christians in places like Kenya or wherever that are not Islamic.

Ole Philly plans to live his life for Jesus Christ to the best of his ability. Philly is from a poor land. The average has only the money to afford a square foot of clothes &/or a 9-square-foot hogan for when it's cold. When it's hot, wearing clothes becomes uncomfy. Philly is well aware he obeys the Matthew commandment not to worry about clothes.

Philly displays all the Christian modesty that his budget permits. Think about it... nudity as a state of being, not doing; poverty merely a circumstance, not anyone's fault. Is he doomed to writhe in hell for all eternity for poverty not even his fault? He is if God's best creation in poverty is inherently morally pornographic.

Do u still think that ole Philly's budget had best improve, thus clothes &/or huts affordable (to mystify the body year-round), on pain of God's eternal wrath?

That's just food for thought.

I found the picture of the 3 children reacting to the "porn" on the computer fascinating. First of all, what adult would be snapping a pic like that, allowing them to see it and then getting such a "perfect" reaction! Hmmmmm... so I clicked on the pic and found that it was actually from A CHRISTMAS PARTY, which causes me to doubt everything I've just read, no matter how true or not.

Zane, you are good, especially in understanding the motives for the picture NOT being related to the article, except, as you rightly point out, being such a "perfect" fit. And we are all together that we have no interest in portraying an actual image of what we talk about here, are we? Yes, thank you.

Dont blame the children, blame the dirt minded, perverted,retarded producers of scuch filth on posters, television etc.They need to be slaughtered. F***** pervert. This goes to anyone that supports these produces.

The problem is that the entire idea of OLPC is stupid. You cannot put a high tech piece of equipment in the hands of neanderthals and expect that it will be used as intended. What did you think that they would use the computer for? Browsing Wikipedia? Perhaps we should start a new project called One Brain Per Idiot, you should all join to receive your share of grey matter.

XO Tablets for Sale

Buy Your XO Tablet on Amazon.com
OLPC is selling the new XO Tablets on Amazon.com for just $149. Buy yours today!

xo-tablet-amazon.jpg

Discussions

Recent Comments

Community Forum

Close