Pornography

[nolesrule]

"Kids - boys and girls both - have been suspended, expelled, and arrested for having and/or sending this sort of thing."

 

This is what happens when the law cannot keep up with technology.

 

Like statutory damages for copyright infringement. Email your friend a copy of a an mp3 or 2, and the statutory damages are up to $220,000 per infringement. But you can buy the song on iTunes for 99-cents. Copyright damages were set into law at a time when illegally duplicating books, music, etc. required a large operation, including printing presses, and was designed to stop the bootleggers from selling knock-offs.

 

The same goes here. Yeah, the behavior was inappropriate, but the real purpose of child pornography laws, including possession laws (which are all about reducing demand) is to protect children from predatory behavior. They weren't written with the idea in mind that a girl would willingly take a naked picture of herself and send it to her friends, but as currently written, it's covered by these laws.

[BrentAllen]

Anyone who thinks sexting isn't a big issue needs to pull their head out of the sand. There have been stories in the news about young girls committing suicide because sexting pictures were sent around her school. The story usually involves the girl sending the pictures to her boyfriend, for his eyes only. They have a fight, or she dumps him, and he retaliates by sending the photos to all his friends. They soon end up everywhere, and she is the laughing stock of the school.

 

Now that we are at Summer Camp season, imagine boys in the shower house with a cell phone camera or digital camera. They would just think it is funny, but let some of those photos get sent around and see how quickly the fun ends. Now imagine it is your son who ended up in the pictures, through no fault of his own.

 

Scouting offers boys an environment in which everyone can feel secure both physically and emotionally. That sense of security comes from Scoutmasters and other adult leaders

1. Setting an example for themselves and others by living the Scout Oath and Law to the best of their abilities.

 

2. Refusing to tolerate name-calling, put-downs, discrimination, or any form of physical aggression.

 

3. Communicating their acceptance of boys by taking a real interest in each Scout.

 

4. Using the Scouting program to create a setting based on learning and fun. They seek the best from each Scout and do all they can to allow him to achieve it.

 

SM HB

 

If that means we are seen as "up-tight" then so be it. Our "up-tight" program provides plenty of adventure for our Scouts.

[acco40]

When my youngest son went to summer camp, his mother bought a disposable camera so he could take some pictures. She is always criticizing me because I don't take enough pictures. This was about six years ago so digital cameras were not quite as common as they are now.

 

Well, a week after camp my wife is furious with me (father & Scoutmaster). It seems some of the Scouts, for whatever reason, took the disposable camera, shoved it down their pants and took pictures! Not knowing what was on film until she picked up the developed pictures - my wife was not is the best of moods. How could I have let this happen, she asks.

 

Well, at the next troop meeting I stated, with a straight face, what had happened and if any of the boys would like to come forward and confess. No takers. I then stated that I "had proof" and there was a way in which I could identify the culprits! After that, four of the boys came to me in private and apologized. It was a prank but the boys were not aware of the "seriousness" of their actions.

[qwazse]

Regarding parents (or any of us, for that matter) who want to make this into grey area:

Ours is not an organization that allows youth to skinny dip or otherwise expose themselves in mixed company. There are groups out there that offer such opportunities. (A friend, who happens to be a lesbian, said such was one of her more formative events.) Anyone interested in letting their kid to be "enlighted" while "eating tainted brownies," can find another youth movement. Most of our chartered organizations would expect us to tow the line. And that means removing pornographic images (be they of friends or strangers) from the possesion of our youth.

 

That said, it is impossible to shelter our kids from the overwhelming influence of modern media. (Just try stopping in Miami on the way to Seabase.) So, in addition to having the cop/lawer come in and talk about the 11th point of the scout law; I would suggest you ask your charter organization or the youth's religious leaders if they have something to offer in terms of instruction/guidance.

 

The important thing here is not to throw down a bunch of by-laws, but to introduce youth to various resources that they can go to as they tackle this stuff for the rest of their lives.

[Basementdweller]

Where I live, Sexting went from a Felony, kiddy porn thing, to a misdemeanor for those under 18 crowd. There was a local girl that committed suicide over her pictures being circulated around school.

 

In the more affluent areas around town it is a big joke. kids will be kids and It is a safer version of "if I show you mine".

 

I do not condone the activity.

 

Read this, Interesting

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexting

[xlpanel]

Please remember the original part of this debate.

 

We have to consider the Pornography as a whole. So only discussing sexting doesn't accomplish anything. Saying what you would do if underage is not accomplishing anything.

 

You need to assume that the porn is legal, as 99.5% of it is. How would you handle it then. Please no more arguments about liability about confinscating kiddie porn.

 

Adress the bulk of the issue --- the 99.5%.

 

Also, we need to limit ourselves to the real issue -- porn that is 99.5% legal on a phone, not the possibility that scouts will take pictures in the shower. We are not debating allowing/disallowing cell phones.

 

 

IMO, you can't do anything really. If the other kids want to see it, they will. If you catch a kid he doesn't stop. He just hides better.

 

And then we get into the "morally straight" argument.

 

Please define how we determine what is moral.

 

99/100 times the answer to this is "What the majority believes is acceptable and correct"

 

Using this same definition I can conclude that, as statistics say that 97% of boys under 16 admit to seeing porn before, the majority believes this is acceptable, and morally acceptable.

 

I would be delighted to hear other definitions of moral.

 

 

[wendykims]

I have found this discussion to be an interesting one and obviously one that needs serious consideration. An element that I found my self going back to while I read the many posts, is the "new design" of the scout uniform. When I first heard and saw the new Class A Uniform shirt, I was concerned over the fact that there was a special pocket for an I-Pod (or similar). I wondered where such a device fit into the scouting experience. I was concerned that the fun of associating with others would be diminished due to the nature of the I-Pod (or similar) as it is designed to be an independent activity. It was explained to me that "we need to keep up with the times. Our scouts are utilizing technology and we need to aid them by keeping the design of the uniform current." (statement made by a scouting decision maker)

 

With this concern stated, I feel compelled to suggest that electronic devices that are not specifically designed to aid a scout (GPS, weather radio) be eliminated from the scouting experience. I remember traveling as a kid with no cell phones and limited electronic engagement and you know, I learned how to get from place to place, knew better how to read a map, took time to find a pay phone, and over all, not only enjoyed the experience but learned from it and survived it.

 

Specifically relating to porn, I agree that Porn is entirely too available. Let's find ways to limit the accessibility our children have to porn. By interacting and engaging kids in activities and conversations, it seems to me that we can potentially reduce the opportunities our kids have to access it.

[qwazse]

Let's not confuse "what is normal" with "what is moral". The preponderance of young males may have looked at pornography. (The current statistic is probably less than what's been stated in recent posts. Look up Master's and Johnson if you really care.) But, if I were to ask them if it is right to gawk at images of someone else's spouse in a compromising position, the majority would say "no". (Note: your girlfriend is not your spouse.) If I were to ask most charter organization reps, the overwhelming majority would aggree. So, the moral standard that we uphold (for adults and youth) is to eschew pornography.

 

Are we gonna throw stones at people over it? No! Are we going to require them to not bring it on BSA activities? Yes!

 

If folks insist on bucking this widely accepted interpretation of "morally straight" then they can find another youth organization that doesn't make a big deal about it.

[PeteM]

Thanks for all of the responses. It will be a big help in addressing this situation within the troop.

 

To xlpanel, you state that 99.5% of porn is legal. At what age, sir is it legal in your country?

In the USA, you have to be at over 18 years old in order to have legal possession of the material. At last check (my math might be a bit on the rusty side), the scouting movement in this country goes from 6.5 to 18. That means to me that any scout that has it is in a legal situation of handling material for someone older.

[BrentAllen]

xlpanel,

I'm sorry to hear you are having a difficult time defining morality. There are many sources you can fall back on, especially in your religious institution.

Short of that, try this standard:

Is the act or subject matter something you could comfortably discuss with your mom, dad AND religious leader at the kitchen table? If not, then you should take a hard look at the subject matter; my guess is it will probably not pass the "moral" test.

 

Teaching our youth to make moral and ethical decisions is our mission. How we go about teaching our youth may vary, but that is the misson of the BSA - not teaching how to camp. If our youth are only learning how to better hide their failings (porn), then we are failing in our mission. I personally believe the teaching begins with the attitude of the adult leaders, and the culture they foster in their Troop. The youth you mention may be pretty good at hiding their porn, but you must remember that God gave adults one advantage they will always have over the youth - years of experience.

 

Finally, if I had a Scout who just got better at hiding his porn, or anything similar, he would ultimately have to make a decision - does he want to be a Scout or not? A Scout wouldn't do that, so either correct your ways or leave the Troop.

[xlpanel]

OK people may have misunderstood about defining moral.

 

So, lets just take the first definition or moral that appears in google:define

 

concerned with principles of right and wrong or conforming to standards of behavior and character based on those principles; "moral sense"; "a ...

the significance of a story or event; "the moral of the story is to love thy neighbor"

psychological rather than physical or tangible in effect; "a moral victory"; "moral support"

 

Ok, so basically we can define moral just fine.

 

Next, how do we determine what is moral?

 

Say I am a muslim. With my parents and religious leader around, I could (if I was a woman) never discuss going out in public without my head covered. This would be frowned upon.

 

Or say I am a christian. Could I discuss supporting any islamic group freely with my religious leader? That would be frowned upon.

 

Soooooo, how do we, as a whole, determine what is moral?

 

Well, almost everyone will tell us that we can determine what is moral by accepting what the majority believes about an issue.

 

The Majority of people believe slavery is immoral ...... thus it is. HOWEVER, if we go back to the 1600s, the Majority of people thought slavery was perfectly acceptable, and thus it was moral then, when the majority accepted it.

 

So basically, moral can be deemed a trumped-up word without true meaning as it basically means majority rule.

 

Majority rule can lead to the worst sort of human-rights violations. If we assume the majority is in control (which it always is) and there are 20 people in a room, 19/20 are christian and 1 is a muslim. Well, these particular christians believe that all muslims are evil and need lynched. The christians have no one to answer to, as they are in charge. So they lynch the muslim.

 

Is it moral to lynch someone just because you disagree? No.

 

So, we can see that if morality is defined as majority belief system it creates a logical fallacy unto itself and cannot be truly defined, and thus can be rendered worthless.

 

 

 

And I agree that it is illegal for under 18s to possess porn. I was making the point that we are not to assume the porn is of under 18s.

 

And if you found someone under 18 with porn, would you report them to the police? If not, you are guilty of assisting with a crime as well, by failure to turn over evidence of wrongdoing. So you have committed, in actuality, a crime that is considered more severe by law enforcement than the kid with the porn. You both are guilty of an offense.

 

Thus the whole argument about under 18s in possession falls.

[Eamonn]

"Or say I am a Christian. Could I discuss supporting any Islamic group freely with my religious leader? That would be frowned upon."

 

I'm a Roman Catholic.

I had lunch today with a Rabi, a Imam and a Presbyterian.

A few weeks back I went out of my way to ensure that the Jewish people where I work were able to celebrate the festival of Passover.

I have helped organize Ramadan for the Muslims and the Feast of Green Corn for Native Americans.

 

For me "Morally straight" Is as I posted doing the right thing, just because it's the right thing to do.

Each of us has ownership of the oath we make:

On my honor I will do my best

To do my duty to God and my country.

It's way too easy to try and make it a "One size fits all" but that just isn't the case.

Eamonn

 

[xlpanel]

So with no 'one size fits all' everyone is allowed to have their own standard of morality.

 

What if the kid who brought the porn has a standard that approves of it? Are you calling his moral standard wrong?

 

If you are why? Just because it conflicts with your standard? Just because you don't believe its right? Why do you get to determine what is moral?

 

Who gets to determine what it is? An individual for himself? You for everyone? the Morality Czar on Capitol Hill?

 

If everyone can have their own standard their is no true morality. Thus I contend morality is a hyped-up worthless term as there is no true definition.

 

How can you support something if you can't globally define it?

[PeteM]

An easy way to do this, I guess, is to ask the Scout to show these pictures to his Grandmother and she what she says.

[xlpanel]

With all these different standards, who says his grandmother is right? Maybe she is old, and out of touch with the beliefs of the majority. Just as if he asked his grandmother to name him the #1 song on the billboard 100.

 

And while he is at it, why doesn't he ask his 85 year old great-grandfather, a die hard redneck confederate, about the morality of slavery?

 

And his cousin Bud, who is 20, about the morality of underage drinking.

 

 

Everyone has a different standard of what is moral. There is no true definition. Thus morality=fail.