@PhilosophyExp @PhilosophyExp Hence, pornography should be legal for 14 years old.
-
-
Replying to @dicophilo
@dicophilo Doesn't necessarily follow (for example, I might think pornography should be illegal because women have rights against it).2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@PhilosophyExp@dicophilo Women may have rights against it. Feminist talking point. Porn girls and other sex workers claim right to do.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tibfulv
@PhilosophyExp@dicophilo I'm inclined to believe the people in the business over radical feminists. Matter of consent?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tibfulv
@tibfulv@dicophilo I think Rae Langton's rights-based argument against porn is the strongest available, but I don't think it's decisive.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@PhilosophyExp@tibfulv References ? I'd be happy to read it / about it.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dicophilo
@dicophilo@tibfulv This is the classic statement. (Langton is undoubtedly a superb philosopher): http://bit.ly/1A1BG2M2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@PhilosophyExp@dicophilo Dear goodness, is she using the extreme nutcase _MacKinnon as a verified truth teller? The woman's a known liar.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tibfulv
@tibfulv@dicophilo No, it's a different argument. You should read it. It's very smart (even if one thinks it ultimately fails - as I do).1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@PhilosophyExp@dicophilo Oh good. I'll have to take some time to read it. At this point in time, reading's sadly a major chore.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
@tibfulv @dicophilo because what Langton is doing is showing how MacKinnon's argument against porn might be defended, etc).
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.