Skip Nav
Memes
We Found the Viral "Dancing Dad" From the Super Bowl, and He's Beyond Amazing
Tech Tips
The Instagram Hack You've Been Waiting For Is Finally Here
Geek Culture
You Can't Stop, Won't Stop Staring at These Magical Harry Potter GIFs

Man Arrested for Viewing Porn on Nun's Computer

Have You Used Someone Else's Computer to View Sites You Shouldn't?

A New Jersey man was arrested this week for regularly sneaking into a church to access porn on a nun's computer, SFGate reports. He was finally caught by a custodian and chased out to a police officer, but I have to wonder what this guy was on. Maybe he didn't have his own computer, but a NUN'S computer?! I mean, I freak out when I'm at the library and think someone next to me is using the computers there to access porn, but a CHURCH? Really?! That's a form of desperation (or fetishism?) I just cannot wrap my head around.

I did a poll a few months ago asking you guys if you used your work computer to view NSFW content, and a lot of you did. So now I want to know, have you ever used someone else's computer (work computers only count if it was your coworker's computer) to access porn, NSFW content, or any stuff you basically thought you shouldn't be looking at?

Source

Around The Web

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

Join The Conversation
macgirl macgirl 8 years
ratjaws you're a troll and everyone is done playing your game.
ratjaws ratjaws 8 years
macgirl, The topic includes breaking and entering, a nun, and a computer... with porn on it. I bring it up because, contrary to our cultural opinion, pornography is a crime, as is breaking and entering. We work overtime creating locks and security systems to prevent unwelcome entry but unfortunately welcome... go out of our way to invite and protect intruders in our bedroom. What a mixed up society we live in that will give up it's life for a lesser good while turning over it's soul to a great evil.
ratjaws ratjaws 8 years
macgirl,The topic includes breaking and entering, a nun, and a computer... with porn on it. I bring it up because, contrary to our cultural opinion, pornography is a crime, as is breaking and entering. We work overtime creating locks and security systems to prevent unwelcome entry but unfortunately welcome... go out of our way to invite and protect intruders in our bedroom. What a mixed up society we live in that will give up it's life for a lesser good while turning over it's soul to a great evil.
macgirl macgirl 8 years
All I know is "as a woman" I find you off topic and slightly annoying but whatever.
ratjaws ratjaws 8 years
The question then arises, when arguing for or against porn, what are you arguing? Basically, we argue taste and not right. Porn is not to your, and many others, taste, that's fine. However, that does not make consensual involvement or viewing of porn wrong. ===>If the subject was ice cream or the type of fabric in one's clothes I would agree with you that this topic is about taste. On the contrary we are talking about the most intimate of human relations so it is about morality. It matters not whether two people consent to murder another and in a like manner it cannot make pornography licit if it's nature is intrinsically evil. To consent to an evil no matter how many may give their agreement can never make it a good. Nor does it make the man's crimes more wrong. He broke in to a person's home and violated their privacy, what happens after that is all part of the initial violation. Like I wrote in my first post, IDing the victim as a Nun or mentioning that he viewed porn are sensational; however, as anyone who has had their private space violated can attest, it is the fact someone entered your space without consent and used or stole your personal property that destroys the sense of security and safety. It is the loss of a victim's feeling of safety, security, and privacy in their home that is the violation, because it is often never recovered. Porn has nothing to do with it. ===>Certainly you misunderstand what I say again for I did not mean to imply invasion of privacy at the level of property was any less a moral evil than you suggest. What i did mean is that invasion of privacy at the level of personhood is a greater evil because at property level it's an evil due only to the person's dignity. We don't condemn car theft simply because of the car rather we value the car since it is owned by a person and the theft is an attack on the person. Likewise both invasion of privacy and pornography are attacks on the person but porn is the more serious since it involves the person's body, not a possession. In other words the body IS the person. I also disagree with your position on the victim. What you call sensational is more subtly significance (or the sign value). Nuns are associated with religion and therefore the religious position, of which you certainly concur by bringing it up in the first place, carries a definite moral association. To attack the symbol is to offend that which is signified. To invade a Nun's property is as bad as to invade anyone else's property but this case is worse precisely because the Nun's presence clearly stands in contrast to the very kind of act the invasion of privacy involves. The Nun's presence invokes purity while pornography is about impurity. This is exactly what makes the contrast so unavoidable to recognize. Furthermore it is this dullness of sensitivity that I point to in our society that needs to be noticed and addressed. I do not mean to belittle the victim's feelings of being violated by the break in. It is an evil and as such needs to be addressed in an appropiate manner. No, what I am pointing to is a much greater evil that has undergone a cultural transformation that is now viewed as if a "good" to be desired. This inversion of truth is harmful rather than freeing. We are constantly being told there is written somewhere in the Constitution a "right" to pornography yet I fail to find it even addressed by those who framed it. Therefore porn has everything to do with the article's subject and relative to the seriousness of each problem, the question I posed has everything to do with the most fundamental and serious problem.
ratjaws ratjaws 8 years
The question then arises, when arguing for or against porn, what are you arguing? Basically, we argue taste and not right. Porn is not to your, and many others, taste, that's fine. However, that does not make consensual involvement or viewing of porn wrong. ===>If the subject was ice cream or the type of fabric in one's clothes I would agree with you that this topic is about taste. On the contrary we are talking about the most intimate of human relations so it is about morality. It matters not whether two people consent to murder another and in a like manner it cannot make pornography licit if it's nature is intrinsically evil. To consent to an evil no matter how many may give their agreement can never make it a good. Nor does it make the man's crimes more wrong. He broke in to a person's home and violated their privacy, what happens after that is all part of the initial violation. Like I wrote in my first post, IDing the victim as a Nun or mentioning that he viewed porn are sensational; however, as anyone who has had their private space violated can attest, it is the fact someone entered your space without consent and used or stole your personal property that destroys the sense of security and safety.It is the loss of a victim's feeling of safety, security, and privacy in their home that is the violation, because it is often never recovered. Porn has nothing to do with it.===>Certainly you misunderstand what I say again for I did not mean to imply invasion of privacy at the level of property was any less a moral evil than you suggest. What i did mean is that invasion of privacy at the level of personhood is a greater evil because at property level it's an evil due only to the person's dignity. We don't condemn car theft simply because of the car rather we value the car since it is owned by a person and the theft is an attack on the person. Likewise both invasion of privacy and pornography are attacks on the person but porn is the more serious since it involves the person's body, not a possession. In other words the body IS the person.I also disagree with your position on the victim. What you call sensational is more subtly significance (or the sign value). Nuns are associated with religion and therefore the religious position, of which you certainly concur by bringing it up in the first place, carries a definite moral association. To attack the symbol is to offend that which is signified. To invade a Nun's property is as bad as to invade anyone else's property but this case is worse precisely because the Nun's presence clearly stands in contrast to the very kind of act the invasion of privacy involves. The Nun's presence invokes purity while pornography is about impurity. This is exactly what makes the contrast so unavoidable to recognize. Furthermore it is this dullness of sensitivity that I point to in our society that needs to be noticed and addressed. I do not mean to belittle the victim's feelings of being violated by the break in. It is an evil and as such needs to be addressed in an appropiate manner. No, what I am pointing to is a much greater evil that has undergone a cultural transformation that is now viewed as if a "good" to be desired. This inversion of truth is harmful rather than freeing. We are constantly being told there is written somewhere in the Constitution a "right" to pornography yet I fail to find it even addressed by those who framed it. Therefore porn has everything to do with the article's subject and relative to the seriousness of each problem, the question I posed has everything to do with the most fundamental and serious problem.
ratjaws ratjaws 8 years
chakra_healer [+] 20 As you pointed out, people do participate "willingly" in pornography, yet the majority do not commit crimes in the pursuit of viewing or participation in the genre. Accordingly, due to it being a consensual, adult activity, porn is a legitimate enterprise, profession, past time, etc. ===>You confuse production and use of porn as though the same subject. While there are no federal or state laws against viewing some pornography, child porn is illegal to possess and there may be company regulations against using porn in general (as some have suggested here). There certainly are laws against the production and distribution of pornography. This situation logically follows from the problem of prosecuting the two kinds of involvement. More importantly it is due to the nature of the problem we are trying to address and this is how shall we treat human sexuality. If human life is sacred, never to be treated in a base or insensitive manner, then it logically follows that procreation or the act through which human life enters into this world, must also be treated appropiately. Thus to violate or disturb the conjugal act whether in actuality or in sign (through images) is to in some way an attack on our human dignity. This disrespect is what underlies our "culture of death" as former Pope John Paul II called it. It lies at the bottom of our cultural courseness and drift toward a society that uses human beings rather than teaches respect and nurtures love. Do you as a woman like being manipulated and used?
ratjaws ratjaws 8 years
chakra_healer [+] 20 As you pointed out, people do participate "willingly" in pornography, yet the majority do not commit crimes in the pursuit of viewing or participation in the genre. Accordingly, due to it being a consensual, adult activity, porn is a legitimate enterprise, profession, past time, etc.===>You confuse production and use of porn as though the same subject. While there are no federal or state laws against viewing some pornography, child porn is illegal to possess and there may be company regulations against using porn in general (as some have suggested here). There certainly are laws against the production and distribution of pornography. This situation logically follows from the problem of prosecuting the two kinds of involvement. More importantly it is due to the nature of the problem we are trying to address and this is how shall we treat human sexuality. If human life is sacred, never to be treated in a base or insensitive manner, then it logically follows that procreation or the act through which human life enters into this world, must also be treated appropiately. Thus to violate or disturb the conjugal act whether in actuality or in sign (through images) is to in some way an attack on our human dignity. This disrespect is what underlies our "culture of death" as former Pope John Paul II called it. It lies at the bottom of our cultural courseness and drift toward a society that uses human beings rather than teaches respect and nurtures love. Do you as a woman like being manipulated and used?
ratjaws ratjaws 8 years
chakra_healer [+] 19 "What is irrelevant in discerning the moral aspect is whether one is a Christian or not since each person has a conscience (properly formed or not) with which to judge right and wrong" This was not the position you closed the 1st post with, to quote: "not as Muslim culture perceives but as Christian moderation directs", you compared belief systems and highlighted one as being superior. Therefore my point was relevant. Simply because someone is not of your beliefs does not mean their moral compass is faulty. Indeed, this man could be a very observant and learned Christian, there is no way to know. ===>I'm sorry chakra, you still misunderstand my position. While I did point to "Christian moderation" as the example of morality I in no way meant to say it was, as you suggest "because someone is not of your beliefs... their moral compass is faulty." While I do believe the Christian, and in particular Catholic moral position is nominal, this in no way is to assert all other positions are wrong. At the same time I in no way will assert that all positions are correct especially when they are mutually contradictory. Of course this answer is very general and the only way to overcome it's ambiguity is to become more specific. Now as you must well know the Muslim position on moderation in dress for women is NOT the same as the Christian position. So in my point I'm addressing one particular belief, not all others as you clearly imply by use of the phrase "belief systems." Quite to the contrary, my position is the same since I stated we all have a moral compass called conscience. It is this very human power that gives us the ability to discern good from bad, right from wrong. As imperfect as this faculty may be it nevertheless is in accord with moral reality for each of us to one degree or another. I suspect it is my reference to an outside guide of greater integrity that you oppose. You said "Indeed, this man could be a very observant and learned Christian, there is no way to know." I agree that in the article's context there is not enough information to know whether this man was a Christian. But again my point makes this irrelevant since he has a conscience with which to know that his acts of breaking in, using private property without permission, and using pornography were all bad.
ratjaws ratjaws 8 years
chakra_healer [+] 19 "What is irrelevant in discerning the moral aspect is whether one is a Christian or not since each person has a conscience (properly formed or not) with which to judge right and wrong"This was not the position you closed the 1st post with, to quote: "not as Muslim culture perceives but as Christian moderation directs", you compared belief systems and highlighted one as being superior. Therefore my point was relevant. Simply because someone is not of your beliefs does not mean their moral compass is faulty. Indeed, this man could be a very observant and learned Christian, there is no way to know.===>I'm sorry chakra, you still misunderstand my position. While I did point to "Christian moderation" as the example of morality I in no way meant to say it was, as you suggest "because someone is not of your beliefs... their moral compass is faulty." While I do believe the Christian, and in particular Catholic moral position is nominal, this in no way is to assert all other positions are wrong. At the same time I in no way will assert that all positions are correct especially when they are mutually contradictory. Of course this answer is very general and the only way to overcome it's ambiguity is to become more specific. Now as you must well know the Muslim position on moderation in dress for women is NOT the same as the Christian position. So in my point I'm addressing one particular belief, not all others as you clearly imply by use of the phrase "belief systems."Quite to the contrary, my position is the same since I stated we all have a moral compass called conscience. It is this very human power that gives us the ability to discern good from bad, right from wrong. As imperfect as this faculty may be it nevertheless is in accord with moral reality for each of us to one degree or another. I suspect it is my reference to an outside guide of greater integrity that you oppose.You said "Indeed, this man could be a very observant and learned Christian, there is no way to know." I agree that in the article's context there is not enough information to know whether this man was a Christian. But again my point makes this irrelevant since he has a conscience with which to know that his acts of breaking in, using private property without permission, and using pornography were all bad.
Dollylo Dollylo 8 years
No, never! If I want to see something, no matter what, I use my very own computer at home! ;)
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
Hypervigilance. Some people experience hypervigilance after a crime like this and are never the same. If the woman had found her personal quarters were used by a strange man, whether he viewed porn or not, she would still be deeply affected. Sorry for the long posts's everyone. I am just in from celebrating the Giant's victory. :) To bed...
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
Hypervigilance.Some people experience hypervigilance after a crime like this and are never the same. If the woman had found her personal quarters were used by a strange man, whether he viewed porn or not, she would still be deeply affected.Sorry for the long posts's everyone. I am just in from celebrating the Giant's victory. :)To bed...
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
As you pointed out, people do participate "willingly" in pornography, yet the majority do not commit crimes in the pursuit of viewing or participation in the genre. Accordingly, due to it being a consensual, adult activity, porn is a legitimate enterprise, profession, past time, etc. The question then arises, when arguing for or against porn, what are you arguing? Basically, we argue taste and not right. Porn is not to your, and many others, taste, that's fine. However, that does not make consensual involvement or viewing of porn wrong. Nor does it make the man's crimes more wrong. He broke in to a person's home and violated their privacy, what happens after that is all part of the initial violation. Like I wrote in my first post, IDing the victim as a Nun or mentioning that he viewed porn are sensational; however, as anyone who has had their private space violated can attest, it is the fact someone entered your space without consent and used or stole your personal property that destroys the sense of security and safety. It is the loss of a victim's feeling of safety, security, and privacy in their home that is the violation, because it is often never recovered. Porn has nothing to do with it.
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
As you pointed out, people do participate "willingly" in pornography, yet the majority do not commit crimes in the pursuit of viewing or participation in the genre. Accordingly, due to it being a consensual, adult activity, porn is a legitimate enterprise, profession, past time, etc.The question then arises, when arguing for or against porn, what are you arguing? Basically, we argue taste and not right. Porn is not to your, and many others, taste, that's fine. However, that does not make consensual involvement or viewing of porn wrong. Nor does it make the man's crimes more wrong. He broke in to a person's home and violated their privacy, what happens after that is all part of the initial violation. Like I wrote in my first post, IDing the victim as a Nun or mentioning that he viewed porn are sensational; however, as anyone who has had their private space violated can attest, it is the fact someone entered your space without consent and used or stole your personal property that destroys the sense of security and safety. It is the loss of a victim's feeling of safety, security, and privacy in their home that is the violation, because it is often never recovered. Porn has nothing to do with it.
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
"What is irrelevant in discerning the moral aspect is whether one is Christian a or not since each person has a conscience (properly formed or not) with which to judge right and wrong" This was not the position you closed the 1st post with, to quote: "not as Muslim culture perceives but as Christian moderation directs", you compared belief systems and highlighted one as being superior. Therefore my point was relevant. Simply because someone is not of your beliefs does not mean their moral compass is faulty. Indeed, this man could be a very observant and learned Christian, there is no way to know.
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
"What is irrelevant in discerning the moral aspect is whether one is Christian a or not since each person has a conscience (properly formed or not) with which to judge right and wrong"This was not the position you closed the 1st post with, to quote: "not as Muslim culture perceives but as Christian moderation directs", you compared belief systems and highlighted one as being superior. Therefore my point was relevant. Simply because someone is not of your beliefs does not mean their moral compass is faulty. Indeed, this man could be a very observant and learned Christian, there is no way to know.
ratjaws ratjaws 8 years
Chakra, you misunderstand my point. It's rapped up in your comment that "he violated another's personal, private space." That's what pornography is about and why it carries greater moral weight than using someones property. Certainly you can agree there is a greater violation of privacy relative to the person (nude body) than property (computer)? What is irrelevant in discerning the moral aspect is whether one is Christian a or not since each person has a conscience (properly formed or not) with which to judge right and wrong. Pornography is bad because it is the misuse of a person (through their image) in a similar way burning the US flag attacks an intangeable aspect of our form of government. That pornography is part of our society only begs the question as to whether it is a legitimate activity or not. Furthermore we must first ask is an act good for an individual in order to determine if it is good for a society?
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
I haven't covered any new media laws yet. :) However, I would think stealing wifi is prosecuted as a hacking offense. That they are breaking into a network and stealing something that has a value, whatever the fee may be, there is a value. Hmm. That's a great question, Macgirl! I can't think of a reason why he, as an unauthorized user, could not be charged with theft of internet. In fact, that seems like a perfectly valid charge. Still a misdemeanor offense, tho, but a good one. :)
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
I haven't covered any new media laws yet. :)However, I would think stealing wifi is prosecuted as a hacking offense. That they are breaking into a network and stealing something that has a value, whatever the fee may be, there is a value. Hmm.That's a great question, Macgirl!I can't think of a reason why he, as an unauthorized user, could not be charged with theft of internet. In fact, that seems like a perfectly valid charge. Still a misdemeanor offense, tho, but a good one. :)
macgirl macgirl 8 years
chakra_healer, curious if they got him on theft for stealing the use of the internet? If they can prosecute people for "stealing" wifi outside of coffee houses then I would imagine it could apply to this case too. Just wondering.
macgirl macgirl 8 years
Pornography isn't illegal, breaking and entering is.
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
The question is not wrong, what matters is that he broke in and used someone's computer. Would anyone feel better if he broke in and read "The Onion"? No. Point is he violated another's personal, private space. What he did in that time is sensational, but irrelevant.Not everyone is a Christian or believes pornography is bad. Therefore, since America is not a Christian Theocracy, yes pornography is a part society. If you would like to live somewhere it is not, try Alabama. The state has some of the most strict obscenity laws in the country.
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
The question is not wrong, what matters is that he broke in and used someone's computer. Would anyone feel better if he broke in and read "The Onion"? No. Point is he violated another's personal, private space. What he did in that time is sensational, but irrelevant. Not everyone is a Christian or believes pornography is bad. Therefore, since America is not a Christian Theocracy, yes pornography is a part society. If you would like to live somewhere it is not, try Alabama. The state has some of the most strict obscenity laws in the country.
ratjaws ratjaws 8 years
This whole question is wrong, rather we must ask "should pornography be allowed in our society?" According to most comments here everyone agrees, but according to our cultural concensus it's a crime to "censor" porn. It seems to me that someone would use another person's computer without their knowledge is a far lesser offense than their use or participation in pornography. Yet millions of men AND women today, in all countries, use AND even participate willingly in pornography to one degree or another. I think we all need to wake up and treat women and human sexuality as it really is... sacred. Not to be shamed but to be hidden in the context of two married persons in love with each other. I say kick the profiteering voyeurs out of our bedrooms by calling a spade a spade. I say a woman's beauty should be valed in public purposely to guard their dignity, not as Muslim culture perceives but as Christian moderation directs. Ratty
Latest Technology & Gadgets
X