Should there be more regulation of pornography?

[melon]

Let's ban heterosexual marriage. That'll end divorce right there.

Melon

 

[80sU2isBest]

Seriously, so once I get married, does this mean that I should cease having any fantasies about male celebrities I find attractive? I mean, I'm married now, so I shouldn't be having fantasies about anyone other than my husband, right?

Angela

As I have said many times before, my beliefs are based on what the Bible and Christ said. Christ said "any man who looks upon a woman with lust has committed adultery with her in his heart". So yes, I believe you would have no business fantasizing about other men.

Even if you take Christianity out of it, do you really think it would be healthy for your marriage to fantasize about sex with someone else? How is it healthy? How does it improve your love toward your husband?

I can tell you how it would be unhealthy - if your husband found out, he might wonder why you're fantasizing about other people, and he'll begin to think he's not enough for you. Even if you assure him he's wrong, doubts can very easily remain. And that wouldn't be his fault for not believing you, it would be your fault for giving him reason to doubt you in the first place.

And think about this, also: wouldn't you feel guilty about it?

 

[A_Wanderer]

Is it adultery in his heart if they are both unmarried?

 

[Angela Harlem]

A quickie for the liberal mindsetted folk...When porn is damaging to the family unit, to a couple's stability, or to an individual's esteem...is it still ok? Or should it be regulated? How, of course, is unanswerable in reality (probably), but can it be seen as bad then? I'm not talking about those who use it for fun, to spice up their lives a little, or peruse magazines or watch a video every now and then for a lark with mates or a partner who thinks it's just as funny as the other half...I'm talking of those situations where it becomes an addiction or destroys the confidence and security of a relationship or family.

Have faith I am not speaking from a religious perspective here , but looking at it as something which can possibly harm. On it's own. No comparisons to drugs or guns, just porn which leads to problems. It becomes bad, yeah?

 

[U2DMfan]

Let's say I am naturally inclined to be angry by a certain persons actions, but I bite back and choose to use forgiveness, and grace as I think it is the proper thing to do.

Now, I would think that is a good thing, and something I aspire to do more often. If every thought is so heavily policed, then my initial anger is tantamount to action in the eyes of God? SO it doesn't matter. The thought is equivalent to the action? Sin is sin in the eyes of God, right? So you could sit idle in a room and be sinning as much as a masked murderer? Forgive me if I don't draw the lines on this.

If we are given rules for behavior, and are meant to make decisions based on those rules, then how could we ever make a correct decision if we didn't know what the wrong one was?

Meaning, how would we know what was wrong if we had not entertained it, just as a thought, nothing more than a thought.

About love - as you know, love is more than merely saying "I love you" and "I want to be with you". When you love someone, you treat that person with respect, and you place that person's feelings and needs above your own. What is respectful and loving about looking at another woman naked?

So if you think you love someone and say "I love you" that's not good enough unless you take action and show that person respect or if you place their feeling and needs above yours? So the thought by itself doesn't mean anything does it?
Or is respect a thought? Is placing needs a thought?
Seems to be a similar thread goign on here.

Thinking about turning away from God is a lot different from actually doing so isn't it? Or is there no qualification between the two, thought and action?

I think actions and thoughts are meant to be looked at seperately, and perhaps this is another reason where I don't follow the dogma to a "tee". It confuses me to tell the truth.

And what is respectful, is entirely up to the person intending to be respected. And it would be up to a person's spouse how much lack of respect would be given or not given in this situation.

 

[A_Wanderer]

A quickie for the liberal mindsetted folk...When porn is damaging to the family unit, to a couple's stability, or to an individual's esteem...is it still ok? Or should it be regulated? How, of course, is unanswerable in reality (probably), but can it be seen as bad then? I'm not talking about those who use it for fun, to spice up their lives a little, or peruse magazines or watch a video every now and then for a lark with mates or a partner who thinks it's just as funny as the other half...I'm talking of those situations where it becomes an addiction or destroys the confidence and security of a relationship or family.

Have faith I am not speaking from a religious perspective here , but looking at it as something which can possibly harm. On it's own. No comparisons to drugs or guns, just porn which leads to problems. It becomes bad, yeah?

Yes it can possibly harm; but like guns, tobacco and alcohol that does not mean that it should be banned or face ridiculous levels of regulation.

I am not saying the above should not be regulated to some extent, but it would be wrong for the state to place restrictions on legal pornography on those of age.

 

[U2DMfan]

A quickie for the liberal mindsetted folk...When porn is damaging to the family unit, to a couple's stability, or to an individual's esteem...is it still ok? Or should it be regulated? How, of course, is unanswerable in reality (probably), but can it be seen as bad then? I'm not talking about those who use it for fun, to spice up their lives a little, or peruse magazines or watch a video every now and then for a lark with mates or a partner who thinks it's just as funny as the other half...I'm talking of those situations where it becomes an addiction or destroys the confidence and security of a relationship or family.

Have faith I am not speaking from a religious perspective here , but looking at it as something which can possibly harm. On it's own. No comparisons to drugs or guns, just porn which leads to problems. It becomes bad, yeah?

When and if you choose to regulate something should not be predicated on addiction by itself, any addiction can be damaging.
There is harm in addiction as there is harm in driving 100 miles an hour over the speed limit. It's all relative to who and what it is harming.

You are given free reign to speed down the highway at whatever pace that you choose. It might not be legal, but it is up to you as an adult to make the distinction between right and wrong.

Why do people have such a problem with pornogrpahy as opposed to other dangerous addictions? Because of that whole morality thing. Which should be a personal decision made by adults, morality that is. Children should be protected under the guise of morality until they can make the decisions for themselves.

So the idea of regulation is fine, if you are trying to protect children. Consenting adults should have free reign to choose their own morality.

Why should yours or somebody elses' ideals about the evils of porn apply to me, a grown adult able to make these decisions for myself, when I don't pose the same question about other evil addictions that bother me to you and wish that it be regulated by the state?

back more pointedly to your first question, when anything, anything at all is damaging to a couple's stability, a person's esteem it's not a good thing for them. But who and what makes those distinctions but those people themselves? It could be porn, or he could watch too much sports.

Who is to say Joe Blow addicted to porn, is shunning his wife because of his deviant fantasies, then porn is made illegal in his state, turns to gambling and shuns his wife and destroys his family nonetheless.

At what point is it up to individuals to make decisions about their own lives seperate from the government stepping in? Who makes the distinction? This is why I don't believe in legislating morality.

Regulation is fine, in terms of making something accessible or not to children. If you are old enough to make decisions that affect the outcome of the rest of your life, you are old enough to decide that you should or shouldn't participate in the viewing of porn.

Why would we treat adults with kid gloves concerning porn and let them buy as much alcohol as they wanted? Because a lot of those moralists like to drink. Which is perfectly fine, as long as they don't harm other individuals. I believe in the idea of being consistent, you either believe in the liberty of the individual or you don't. Children are to be handled differently, I think we would all agree.

As an offset, as an American I don't agree with the inconsistency of our laws concerning when children are "of age". If when you are 18, you can die in Iraq, you should be able to go buy a beer at the store. Either it's 18 or 21, we should pick a side. Those extra 3 years of course are there because of moralistic legislating. It's the same idea that you can't get a tattoo in my home state. I could go on all day about that. Oklahoma and Iran, the two places on earth you can't get a tattoo. Why? Well it's because of the lawmakers in my state. I'll spare you the anti-right wing bible thumping rant. My basic premise is I think we can make these decisions for ourselves, ESPECIALLY if we are "of age". According to the law, you are of age in one place, and not the other. The only reason for the inconsistency is because of legislated morality.

In short, as an adult, you should have the liberty to destroy your own life, if that's the poor decisions you make. Because if it wasn't pornography it could easily be something else. Pornography is one of the easy "immoral targets", that's really the only difference.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Is it adultery in his heart if they are both unmarried?

I believe that would be fornication in the heart.

 

[Irvine511]

I don't think patronising is the word you're looking for. Patronising means to treat someone with condescension. Nothing I've said has done that.

About love - as you know, love is more than merely saying "I love you" and "I want to be with you". When you love someone, you treat that person with respect, and you place that person's feelings and needs above your own. What is respectful and loving about looking at another woman naked?

As you know, my views on all of this are centered in my Christian faith. Christ said that if a man looks at a woman with lust, he has committed adultery in his heart. That is one reason that I believe porn is wrong, especially in a marriage.

you are absolutely being condescending, thinking that you understand love better, or that someone is incapable of loving as well as you believe you -- and by this i do mean you -- are capable of loving a spouse simply because they've looked at Playboy after being married.

everything you've said smacks of judgement.

 

[Irvine511]

I can tell you how it would be unhealthy - if your husband found out, he might wonder why you're fantasizing about other people, and he'll begin to think he's not enough for you. Even if you assure him he's wrong, doubts can very easily remain. And that wouldn't be his fault for not believing you, it would be your fault for giving him reason to doubt you in the first place.

i suppose this goes to the heart of it all.

you don't have much respect for other human beings, or at least their abilities to make decisions for themselves.

this is where the far left and the far right have so much in common: both of them think they know what's best for other people.

 

[80sU2isBest]

you are absolutely being condescending, thinking that you understand love better, or that someone is incapable of loving as well as you believe you -- and by this i do mean you -- are capable of loving a spouse simply because they've looked at Playboy after being married.

I didn't say a thing about me. I didn't judge the man compared to me. I judged him compared to what the Lord said. I use that same judgment on everything, including myself. Judging myself agaisnt what the Lord said, in fact, is the most painful, because I am not the man in Christ that I want to be.

everything you've said smacks of judgement, and lack of understanding.

I'm fine with you thinking that. I really am.

 

[80sU2isBest]

i suppose this goes to the heart of it all.

you don't have much respect for other human beings, or at least their abilities to make decisions for themselves.

this is where the far left and the far right have so much in common: both of them think they know what's best for other people.

You don't have much respect for anyone who doesn't agree with your own political agenda, Irvine, so don't forget to put yourself in that group.

 

[pax]

Irvine and 80s, this is starting to get kind of personal. I don't mind if you continue the discussion, but each of you assuming that the other has no respect for other people is pretty unfair. Let's stick to the issue at hand.

Thanks.

 

[Irvine511]

You don't have much respect for anyone who doesn't agree with your own political agenda, Irvine, so don't forget to put yourself in that group.

as i've said before: i don't have respect for people who don't make good arguments. i'm not telling people that i know the best way for them to live their lives. please, let me know what this political agenda is.

you push an agenda that's wonderfully self-serving, and then back away and say, "oh, it's not me, it's the LORD who says all these things."

well, next time Jesus calls you on the phone and let's you know what he thinks about a happily married couple who enjoy soft-core porn as a prelude to their lovemaking, you are free to let us all know what the Lord says.

until then, a little humility and a little less judgement would be appreicated.

 

[Felicity]

Zing.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Is it homophobic to be averse to hardcore pornography?

 

[Irvine511]

Is it homophobic to be averse to hardcore pornography?

what does one have to do with the other?

unless you think that gay porn is, by definition, hardcore?

 

[martha]

I judged him

Said with absolutely no irony at all. Brilliant!

Oh, and polka king, I'm so glad you let me know that my loving husband of nearly 16 years has no respect for me because he likes to look at the naked chicks in Playboy!

I had no idea!

 

[pax]

I think this thread is hitting the end of its useful life span.

 

[Irvine511]

Said with absolutely no irony at all. Brilliant!

Oh, and polka king, I'm so glad you let me know that my loving husband of nearly 16 years has no respect for me because he likes to look at the naked chicks in Playboy!

I had no idea!

Martha, poor little lamb, don't you realize they know what's best? they judge because they love!

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I think this thread is hitting the end of its useful life span.

I think so too I think it already did actually

 

[pax]

Right on, kids.

Off to Locksville.

I think we might have gotten a bit carried away at the end.