Originally Posted by WNGMSTR
Offering soft porn is a 1A issue? So this should garner support by the public or even someone considering membership or is the answer going to be, don't like it flake off?
I'm here to tell you I surround myself with like minded folks and this issue has come up about this site and it is a turn off to more than most here can imagine. This is a statement.
Afterall this thread is about tin cuppin' for the $20 membership fee, right?
Wing & others that disagree with Tail Trail, I understand what you are saying. However, it sounds like you are arguing more about the execution rather than the principal. By that, I mean that you are not arguing against the First Amendment right, but you don't like the way someone exercises it. The same argument goes on here daily about 2A as to whether open carry or concealed carry is legal, right or constitutional, yet you have no problem with those of other viewpoints being here and expressing them. However, when it comes to 1A, you will not support a site that you spend a lot of time on because it has a adult, by request only sub-forum that contains nudity. No, it is not pornography, which is normally defined as sexual acts created to arouse sexual desire rather than aesthetic enjoyment. Tail Trail truly holds up the standards of a men's magazine such as Playboy or Penthouse and does not venture into sleaze.
Now, if one's values are so Victorian that they do not purchase food in any store that sells Playboy nor buy gas at any convenience store that displays Penthouse, then that person is genuinely prudish enough that they should not be on FTF. But if one truly believe in the Constitution and the rights that it details for us, then one should support the right, and the forum that allows that right, even if they question the manner in which the right is exercised. We have to be careful not to condemn the individual human right when we are condemning the way certain others exercise it. However, as long as their execution falls within the laws of their jurisdiction, they are not doing anything illegal and I think should be supported.
FTF dealt with the posting of R-rated material to the general forums by making a place that R- and Hard R-rated material had a place to be posted that would not be available to anyone under 18 and would not be viewable by those who found it objectionable, but allowed posting by the members that wish to see it. It was a very workable decision that did not impinge on anyone's rights and continued the broad workings of free speech across the site. This was the best working legal and ethical implementation of a solution for a site that champions free speech and Constitutionality. It would be incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to find a site that encompassed only the values one held for themself and implemented them in exactly the way they wished. Most of those sites exist in a vacuum, visited only by their creator. To exist in a society, large or small, we must agree on principals and generally disagree on the way they are exercised to make a state that holds freedom, liberty and self-reliance as pillars upon which to build.