Does it bother you when you see 3-5 year old children in 'R' movies? (1 Viewer)

[Don Black]

Nice debate everyone. Kudos for keeping it polite!

 

[Nathan*W]

Nice debate everyone. Kudos for keeping it polite!

Agreed! See you around the HTF.

 

[NathanP]

I've been seeing R movies since I was 4..
I'm not screwed up at all by it.

 

[Ike]

I have to agree that Don has brought up a point that seems completely acceptable to me, but bothers others-that there are certain laws you knowingly don't follow.

Sure, we all do it-speeding, jaywalking, etc. But to openly say you don't follow a law-and this is being sensible-victim less crimes-is, I'd say, commendable in a lot of situations. Someone who can smoke pot, and it doesn't effect anyone else, more power to him. The same with acid, oral sex, and violating building codes on your own house.

If it ever becomes against the law to show R rated films to anyone under 17, then you'll have that law being broken too.

 

[Seth Paxton]

Actually Don, mental abuse IS a legal reason to have a child taken from you.
For example, playing mind games with your child such as threatening to kill them, waking them up in the middle of the night, or whatever weirdo yet non-physical acts you can think of, could result in the child being removed from the home.
Parents ARE forced to respect their child's physical AND mental well-being. Traumatizing a child by exposing them to some images, experiences, etc that they aren't mentally ready for is mentally abusive.
Is taken a kid to BHD reason to remove a child from their parent? No.
Is a parent who continually neglects their child's mental health going to lose their child? Sure, if someone reports it.
It's not a case of free speech because adults ARE allowed to see these films. But this whole "freedom" thing comes with one KEY restriction.
Since we have to SHARE our freedom with others, there naturally must be restrictions on what we can do. Thus, theft is illegal for example. This isn't "the man" keeping us down, this is your neighbors saying "don't take my shit please" and being willing to pay policemen to make sure you don't.
The same goes for parental freedoms. Parents ARE NOT allowed to do anything they want with a child as it stands right now. There are limits.
For example, child pornography...illegal. Even with a parents consent. If no physical harm is coming to the child and the parent agrees to it, then why is it illegal (and immoral)? Because of mental cruelty. You go to jail for it.
So there are limits to what a parent can approve for a child.
Why is the drinking age 21 instead of 18, or 16? Hey, some 18 years olds are as mature as a 21 year old. It's because you pick an age where it appears ALL OR MOST people can then handle what they are being restricted from.
You do the same with films. Besides, a parent can still rent or buy the DVD and "educate" their child if they want to.
To bad the behavior we see from these kids usually indicates that the parent hasn't brought them with their benefit in mind at all, but simply their own desire to see a film and skip using the babysitter. It's not like we are talking about kids who sit quietly and watch, then as they leave the film are talking about the emotional impact of seeing American soldiers pinned down like that, or questioning our foreign policy.
It's the old "bad apple ruining it for the whole bunch". Some dopes don't thoughtfully regulate what a child sees, so then you have to start doing it for them which means that the rest of the community needs to follow suit.
BTW, I saw lots of "powerful" films when I was younger and I think I did okay. But I did freak out watching Fort Apache the Bronx when I was about 11. Seeing what to me was a very realistic killing of 2 cops at the beginning of the film freaked me out really badly. I was rather haunted by it for quite awhile.
I was glad my dad would take me to all those films, but looking back I can honestly say that that was one film that it might have been okay for him to say "You're too young".

 

[Seth Paxton]

To make sure we are clear here, I'm not talking about no one under 17 to see R films. That's NC-17 and it already exists. Do we have that law being broken all the time? No, maybe sometimes but not all the time.

And theaters won't even carry NC-17 films. So much so that studios recut films to get down to an R rating to get more viewers.

But what I'm talking about is maybe R meaning under 17 must have an adult, and no one under 8 permitted at all. Something like that.

 

[Don Black]

I don't really disagree with what you're saying Seth. I guess I think I'm a little bit more liberal than you when it comes to "lines" and government regulation.