We are an immediate loan specialist in Norton, and we are quicker and more advantageous than run of the mill retail facade banks since we're based on the web and are open constantly. No compelling reason to sit tight for "ordinary business hours" or invest energy flying out to the store — our short application can be finished in not more than minutes. You can even apply from a cell phone while you're in a hurry!
We can loan up to $500 to Norton occupants, in view of qualifying elements. On the off chance that endorsed, your credit will be expected on your next payday that falls in the vicinity of 10 and 31 days after you get your advance. Nitty gritty data with respect to expenses and reimbursement is accessible on our Rates and Terms page. As you consider whether an advance is proper for your prompt needs, you ought to likewise investigate other subsidizing alternatives. A payday credit is a genuine budgetary duty, and not an answer for long haul issues. Getting from a companion of relative may be a superior alternative.
I can remember growing up in the old neighborhood. There was this German, very European family. They had a huge yard that was fenced in with a swimming pool. Then the neighbors discovered that the kids, the parents, other family members and guests, would be openly nude in the backyard and skinny dipping in the pool. When my mother became ill, the woman of the house came to visit her. So they talked about stuff, you know. And the subject of nudity came up. This woman was for open nudity and was so convincing that she had my mother convinced that it was okay. Not that my mother would let me and my sister run around the backyard naked. But even my mother seemed to understand. Then we fast forward into the world of the world wide web and the Internet. Here is a website called Pure Nudism which is based around the old world European concept of open nudity. Only it is photographed and videotaped of nude persons. Although the site does show people of all ages, shapes and sizes naked, that does not seem to justify the $30 a month subscription rate. There is a daily photo available for marketing. Most of the time, these daily photos feature young boys and girls between the ages of 10 and 16, who are very attractive and in a child model's physical condition. Have you seen Pure Nudism? If you have not, have you heard of it? Would you consider this to be child pornography? Most of the photos of nude people will show the models engaged in an activity. Or there are shots of children or a child engaged in an activity and they are not at the center of the photograph. Would you consider this to be tastfully done or merely a way for the owners of the website to please their subscribers but find a way to work around obscenity laws? Do you consider such a website to be obscene? Is it pornographic? What about the photos of nude children? Is this child pornography? How can this site be allowed legally? I am not sure if this is based in the US, but they clearly are operating and conducting business in the US. How can a business get away with offering photographs and video recordings of nude children to American consumers? There are also beauty pageants for young girls on this website. In many cases, the parents are involved in the contests. I little girl, who appeared to be 12 years old, posed nude with her parents nude in accepting an award as the winner of the beauty contest. If my American mother caught me posing for photographs and videocameras in my birthday suit, I would be beaten three ways to Sunday. It would be a cold day in Hell for my mother to ever stand byside me with the two of us naked posing for photographers. And if anyone tried to offer my mother money in exchange for taking nude photos of me as a child, she would have told them where to go and it wouldn't be to the bank to cash the check.
Edit- It is not a dilemna so much as it is confusion as to what the current laws are regarding this. I am in my 40s and I can remember a time when even full frontal adult nudity was considered to be pornographic, let alone showing grown consenting adults having sexual intercourse. They were called porn, because legally back then they were. Now full frontal nudity of adults and adults engaging in all sorts of sexual acts is freely available on cable television and the Internet within easy access to persons of all ages. And so we reach the issue at hand. This is not children having sex with each other nor are they having sex with adults. This is children photographed and videotaped by themselves, and/or with adults. Is this child pornography? Is this art protected under Freedom of Speech and Expression? What is the difference between a parent or grandparent innocently posting a nude photo of one of their offspring on Facebook or MySpace, and a website using professional photographers a
I have heard of the Pure Nudism website but I haven't viewed it myself. Regardless, I can help answer your other questions. If the pictures and videos show people who are merely nude with no sexual activity or intent, then it is not pornography regardless of the ages and genders of the people shown. I don't consider such a website or picture/video content to be obscene or pornographic at all. Nudity is not inherently obscene, lewd, offensive, or pornographic. I don't know about other countries but the US Supreme Court has ruled in the past that pictures of nude people, regardless of age, does not constitute pornography when there is no actual sexual content or activity shown. That ruling came from a case where a newsstand was importing European naturist magazines that had nude photos including children as well as adults and the newsstand owner was charged with distributing child pornography. With that ruling the charges were thrown out. Since it was determined to not be pornographic and not illegal, that does protect it under the first amendment protecting freedom of speech and expression. I don't know what's going on with the beauty contests because such a concept is rather contradictory to the naturist/nudist philosophy that everyone has natural beauty and there should be no quantification of attractiveness or "who is more beautiful than who". With contests comes judgment of appearance, and that judgment is a big factor in the rest of society that we try to escape when living the naturist lifestyle and socializing with other nudists.
Well do think back in the time of the cave man the children had clothes on until they were 18? It is natural to be naked, even if the person is a minor. There are like 2 kinds of nudist camps. There is a kind where any sexual activity is prohibited in any place except where an adult man and woman have privacy, and even then, that is not the reason for being there. Some people who have been nude in such a setting have gotten used to nudity and don't consider not having clothes on to be important. There is another kind of nudist resort where 2 adults will have sex, there and if someone wants to watch them do it that may be ok with the couple. People don't bring their children to such a place. Now if you get turned on when you see pictures of naked children, Then this stuff may be considered to be pornography to you. n.b. an image file of a nude child full frontal is not pornography when it is in the possesion of a nudist who used his camera to take the picture, but it is magically transformed into pornograry when it appears on the monitor of a pedophile., but until then it is just some information in cyberspace that a pedophile can use to make pornography.
I think you people who say that pure nudism site is pornographic are idiots the site it self may be based in ohio but the place pure nudism is world wide they are even in the good old USA so you people who think it is porn needs to take a step back and take a look in the mirror there is nothing wrong with the nude human body when we were created we were all naked just lots of fir or hair but point is we are all naked at one time or another I'm pretty sure some you people as kids has ran out side naked not caring because your a kid but when you got older you looked back and laughed . I have been to many nude beaches and colonies around the world all of them to my knowledge let the minor/kids go nude as long as there is nothing disgusting going on with those kids its is just fine. I have 4 kids of my own 3 girls and a boy 15,12,11, 8 and all of them have been to the nude beaches/colonies with me and they enjoy going nude its there choice not yours.
While technically the pictures on that website do not meet the criteria for porn, it really does amount to nothing more than a soft porn site. I am an AANR nudist. There are real nudist/naturist sites that are wonderful resources about nudism/naturism that contain some pictures, however on those sites the pictures secondary to the information provided and depict average people. Those sites are there for information and do not require a fee to view their content. The site you referenced does contain some articles, but those are secondary to the pictures, which they charge a fee to view. I myself, and most other social nudist find this site offensive. It's only purpose is to exploit nudism/naturism for a buck and serves to reinforce societies misguided opinions about nudism/naturism. Its disgusting and the site owners are pornographers in denial.
Is Pure Nudity exploitative? Yes. Is it porn? No. Would I pay for access? Hell no! There's a big difference between photos of naked people and pornography. I think it's pretty sad that so many people are so out of tune with nakedness that they are unable to tell the difference.
The IP address of www.purenudism.com is 188.8.131.52, which traces to Brooklyn, NY. Not being interested in such sites, my personal opinion is that I have a choice of whether or not to visit them. However, to educate myself as to your dilemma, I visited the site and saw (without joining) one photo showing some naked adults with two naked, very young children shown from behind. I believe this sort of photography is protected by "artistic license." I had a difficult time tracking the Website using standard online tools, so I downloaded a free software called PingPlotter, which within seconds "hopped" from my IP address across various IP jumps used by purenudism.com and found It. If www.purenudism.com indeed shows full-frontal nudity of minors, it may be in violation of U.S. laws. In the U.K., the applicable law is section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978, which prohibits photographs or other likenesses of children 18 and younger naked whether engaged in sex or not, so long as the photos are "indecent," a term not defined by the act but left to juries to decide (see third link below, under "The Law -- Elements of Offence). An interesting recent case was one involving actress Cate Blanchett, who made a gallery showing of nude photos of teenagers that resulted in charges being brough against her. She was cleared.
I haven't seen it.
One mans graphic child porn is another so called " art ".. Disgusting either way exploiting children like that.