Closing 'not family-friendly' Threads

[Twerp]

It was a wise move to delete it, just because someone may be a grown adult, and is mature enough to handle the content, that doesn't mean that person would want to see the content. You can't simply say, "well you chose to look" because you don't know what the thread is really about until you start reading it, and the same can be said about viewing a picture, because in order to know something is inappropriate and you'd not want to view it, you have to see it in the first place. Just because you are 17 years old, that doesn't mean you want to see everything that goes in in a rated R movie. You have to create some sort of standard, otherwise the power of sin is magnified.

There were so many hints of the sexual direction of the story, that you could really see what was going to happen. Choosing to look due to curiosity is okay, but reading that deep into the story without having any clue of what was to come seems pretty unimaginable (take a look at what it was called. that right there should be proof of what was to come).

[Troll King]

So by that logic, one could post a link to a porn site and not encounter any issues if they clearly labelled it as being a link to a porn site?

[Jerome Scuggs]

Maybe he hasn't been ingame for a while? (say... 5 years?)

He's online right now

[Blueblaze]

There were so many hints of the sexual direction of the story, that you could really see what was going to happen. Choosing to look due to curiosity is okay, but reading that deep into the story without having any clue of what was to come seems pretty unimaginable (take a look at what it was called. that right there should be proof of what was to come).

By no means was I supporting keeping the story online if it is as bad as what I hear (I didn't get a chance to see it myself). The point is, you have to remove filth such as that, otherwise people who don't want to hear/see things like that won't inadvertently do so. It is somewhat harder to do it by reading when compared to looking at a filthy image, but still just as possible.

[Blueblaze]

So by that logic, one could post a link to a porn site and not encounter any issues if they clearly labelled it as being a link to a porn site?

If you clearly label something as a pornographic website (without any content shown) then the issue becomes facing the temptation of looking at such material vs. not looking at it. Though the person is not actually showing anything of filth material, but they are providing the key to open the door of pornography. As well, there are several people who wish to not drink, smoke, or look at pornography, but because people tempt them, they fall into that temptation. The question is, is it right to set up even a temptation for a person to sin? My answer, obvious no its not right, thus I would support it to be illegal to even post links to such pornographic material.

[genocidal]

Blueblaze your opinion is worth -346 on this forum.

[Blueblaze]

Blueblaze your opinion is worth -346 on this forum.

I'm sorry if I want to lower rape in the American society. Shame on me <_<

[Noah]

I'm sorry if I want to lower rape in the American society. Shame on me <_<

Hi.



Fuck you.

[Blueblaze]

Hi.



Fuck you.

The bright red of your cross reminds me of the shed blood of Jesus Christ. A touching story of the Savior from glory, who came and gave His blood that we all might live in Christ.

Hebrews 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Praise the Lord, our Savior who shed His blood on the cross, to cleanse away our sinful hearts.

[ZeUs!!]

Heavensent isn't family friendly can we close him?