|
The Naked Galileo
“…Congress shall make no
law prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of
speech…” Pornography on the worldwide web raises controversies
about who’s watching and what purposes it really has. What would Galileo
have to say about this problem? Galileo would respond by saying
pornography is a “good thing” because he is against deeply held
beliefs, looks forward to arguments, and believes in no boundaries.
It pleased the famous, modern scientist Galileo to go against
tradition and deeply held beliefs. Being
a man of religious persecution throughout his life proves he was always
trying to test the word of the Bible.
Besides that, nowhere in the book does it say no Pornography on the
Web. People of religious
thoughts would decide that GOD disapproves of sexual commotion readily
available to any and all. Galileo’s
initiative would be to acccept the nudity and exposure and have lectures
encouraging a view of it. At
these lectures he would have religious groups appalled at his arguments
because of the mere fact that they are just beliefs.
There is no way to prove that the Bible is completely true.
So why would a man of his intellect have the patience to hear out
these religious fools? For
all we know, the Bible could just be a great piece of literature.
The chapters inside present stories to be read for fun and maybe to
teach morals. From my knowledge, if people are going to follow the
teachings of these stories, they are fools.
They are not letting the ideas of others surface.
That is why Galileo was the outcast of his era.
Galileo is smarter in the sense of not following tradition and
finding his own way. He would
be able to justify Pornography on the Web.
In another aspect he strives for arguments.
You just cannot tell him the law is the way it is because we say
so. If pornography on the Web
were banned, Galileo would be the first to question authority and demand
reasonable explanations. He
was a fighter, so when he has people and issues to go up against he is
ready to duke it out. He was neither particularly diplomatic nor particularly harsh
- he simply worked from the assumption that evidence and logic would speak
for themselves. If every
politician in today’s society could realize the facts and reasons, they
would have a stronger case in winning or pushing ideas.
There is not enough evidence and logic to convince Galileo to go
with no porn on the Web. Pornography
is a very natural occurrence if consent is present with the nudist. He would ask questions like who is the porn really hurting?
Who is not benefiting from this action?
Why get rid of something that gives so much pleasure to peoples’
lives? He could win any case
because of his sole reasoning in deciphering the facts and evidence from
the opinions.
Mostly Galileo believes in setting no boundaries on one’s mind.
He does not think that the same God who gave us our senses, our
speech, and our intellect, would have us put aside the use of these, to
teach us instead such things as with their help we could find out for
ourselves. He would let the option of pornography on the Web be
deciphered by the individual. One’s
mind is the key to all doors. The
doors should be entered without limitations.
If the doors are locked we should plunge through them with intent
and proceed with the motives of enlightening our senses. Parents and those who want restrictions on their computers
should set the limitations and the controversy would end.
Galileo always spoke his mind, and always gave material the
critical examination it deserved no matter who authored it.
His interest in discussing a subject and engaging careful critique
is why he is the number one candidate for responding yes to pornography
being a good thing. In today’s contemporary world, Galileo could assess
problematic situations and sway the hardheads to broaden their minds and
live their short lives a little bit.
Reply
Home
|