Should there be more regulation of pornography? - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-23-2005, 09:09 PM   #91
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 04:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


By making such a blanket statement, you are doing exactly what you accused me of:

"This is true, but you don't present your views on it as absolutes, which he does."

Martha, you have proven my earlier point, that most people treat their own beliefs as absolute truth, not just me.
My statement about marriage was based on experience, not what I hoped or expected or believed marriage to be.
__________________

__________________
martha is online now  
Old 05-23-2005, 09:14 PM   #92
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 06:41 PM
nbcrusader, while I ditto the idea of it seeming odd to compare the concept of porn to the concept of killing people, to answer your question, a gun sitting there all by itself with no one around can't exactly do anything, can it? It takes a person holding a gun for something to happen.

Anywho, ditto everything Irvine and martha have been saying in this thread . Porn isn't there for the sole purpose of looking at another human being naked, people. Couples can use it to improve their own sex lives. People can look at porn and see it as an art, as they believe the human body is an art form, and stuff like that. It's not just for lusting purposes.

I dunno, blaming porn and porn alone for the ruin of relationships just seems to me like a glossing over of the underlying problems that said relationships have, and most likely did have long before porn even entered the picture. If porn truly was so negative for relationships, then please, those of you who believe that explain to me how there's still many couples who have porn as part of their lives and yet are still going strong?

Bottom line, I think it should be up to each individual couple to decide what to do regarding porn. If there's couples who have issues with porn, then I suggest they work things out, talk things over, and decide whether or not it stays or goes. And if there's couples who have porn as part of their lives and yet don't have issues with it, and still have a good, honest, open relationship going, then that's that. They're still happy together, so leave 'em be.

Angela
__________________

__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 10:04 PM   #93
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha


My statement about marriage was based on experience, not what I hoped or expected or believed marriage to be.
And my statement about marriage was based on the experience of seeing my mother and father in a porn-free marriage until the day he died in 1993. It is also based on friends of mine who have porn-free marriages. And as I told Irvine, I've never been married, but I've been in love before. I loved her every bit as much as any man ever loved any woman.

You whined about my "absolute statement" about how marriages should be, but turned right around and made your own absolute statement that people who set up marriage "rules" end up miserable. You didn't say "some of them do", you didn't say "they might", you said they "end up miserable".

Admit it Martha, you're every bit as sure that you're absolutely right as I am.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 10:10 PM   #94
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

didn't God create biology?
seems like he keeps setting us up to fail.
I don't have sex, and I certainly don't see it as a failure.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 02:04 AM   #95
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:41 AM
A failure to disperse your genetic material makes you an evolutionary cul de sac.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 03:24 AM   #96
New Yorker
 
the soul waits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: belgium
Posts: 2,528
Local Time: 02:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
good question -- if we are meant to control and suppress lust, and if lust is a sin, just why do we have morning wood pretty much every morning?

Following that logic, would it be fair to conclude that women are not allowed to act on lustful feelings because they don't wake up physically arroused?
__________________
the soul waits is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 03:48 AM   #97
New Yorker
 
the soul waits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: belgium
Posts: 2,528
Local Time: 02:41 AM
I've just finished reading this whole thread and can empathise with both sides of the spectrum (Irvine-80sU2isBest). No, I am not fence-sitting , I genuinenly think that both sides have made valid points.

As for marriage, I think there's absolutely nothing wrong with having ideals and lofty goals regarding marriage, even when you've never been married in your life. I think it's positive to have high goals you want to strive for and, taking into account that 80s is guided through life by his faith, I think his views on this "should" be lofty.
Reality may teach him different ways once he's married, and I like what Martha said about being adaptive towards one another and not let some ideal get the upperhand over what your spouse is trying to communicate to you. That would defeit the whole purpose of being genuinenly loving, imo.

As for pornography, celibacy/having casual sex while being single, etc...I just conclude that this is so very personal. I know for myself that my views on this have changed throughout the years and I'm sure they'll continue to. Nothing is set in stone.

I do disagree strongly with you though, Irvine, about your statement that we all need to feel loved, hence feel the need to have sex with someone while we're single. And that the act of having sex is about as close as one can get to feeling loved while being single. Having casual sex, to me, was (and I say "was") like an itch I needed to scratch (no pun intended) , an urge I didn't want to control, didn't feel the need to control, as I saw nothing wrong with casual sex. I never associated it with love, though. I can perfectly separate the two.
I have decided quite a while ago to train myself to be more disciplined (guess that's where my athletic background comes into play) My social life changed drastically as a result and I feel so much more balanced and stronger.

This is a personal thing to decide and one may feel to act in different ways, depending on where you are in life. I don't frown upon either way of living, casual sex/celibacy, just as long as you keep questioning yourself and your personal set of morals, or when you're religious, your faith. I hesitate to sound hippity-hoppy, but basically I'm saying : keep it real! (cringe!) Take care of yourself, heart, body, mind and soul. That's a personal credo of mine, anyway.

Pornography in a relationship is just another one of those very personal things a couple needs to decide together. I do agree with 80s that respect should prevail always and that, even though a man might know for himself that his desire to watch pornography is innocent and harmless, he shouldn't do so if he knows his wife can't deal with that for any variety of reasons. If she has self-esteem issues f.e., yes, he should help her with getting higher self-esteem, but only with the goal of helping her as she should help him, NOT to "finally" be able to watch the frickin porn, of course .
In other words, he should be able to sacrifice the porn if it makes her feel better. If porn is *that* big a need, he has issues, imo.
__________________
the soul waits is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 04:13 AM   #98
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BonosSaint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,566
Local Time: 08:41 PM
Have no particular position one way or another on this. Couldn't quite get worked up one way or the other. I've enjoyed porn, I've been bored by it, I've been turned off by it. Just wanted to compliment the soul waits on a really reasoned post.
__________________
BonosSaint is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 06:07 AM   #99
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 11:41 AM
Well allow me to sit on the fence. I think this thread has been filled with great replies from both sides, but it's my view that porn should be regulated or even banned where it will cause harm. Porn for children or people of an age too young to formulate healthy ideals about relationships and the gender they are attracted to is a parental necessity. In mature relationships which cannot hold the ramifications of porn in whatever context also needs regulating - for the couple involved, and by the couple involved. If that means sticking to one's own principles, then so be it. It is a necessity. If it is about a man or woman who has become addicted or engages in harmful thoughts or worse, actions, then without a doubt it needs addressing. Who'd enforce this will always be a question though. We need to be aware of the harm before sending someone off to sex therapy. Like all vices, it needs the same due care and attention as any other. Porn which blatantly harms those involved is criminal and needs due follow up. That cannot be regulated enough, in my view.

Those who have provided healthy examples of where it infringes in no negative way on their lives, do not need regulation. That's about the bolts of how it is or should be acceptable.
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 06:51 AM   #100
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by the soul waits
As for marriage, I think there's absolutely nothing wrong with having ideals and lofty goals regarding marriage, even when you've never been married in your life. I think it's positive to have high goals you want to strive for and, taking into account that 80s is guided through life by his faith, I think his views on this "should" be lofty.
Reality may teach him different ways once he's married, and I like what Martha said about being adaptive towards one another and not let some ideal get the upperhand over what your spouse is trying to communicate to you. That would defeit the whole purpose of being genuinenly loving, imo.
I want to thank you for your kind words, they are really appreciated. But I do want to reply to the bit in which you said "reality may teach him different ways once he's married". That sounds like my ideals for marriage are unreachable, and that if I ever do get married, I just might see it crumble. That's just not the case. I'm not some life newbie who just fell off the turnip truck. I've had my share of joys and hardships, I've seen "reality"; I know the way life works. I'm 37 years old. I have had my share of ups and downs in the love department. 15 years ago, my brother died, followed the very next year by my son, followed 3 years later by my father. I'd say I know a bit about reality. But I also know what true faith can do; I've seen it in my life and I've seen it in others. I've seen marriages fail, and I've also seen marriages thrive. And contrary to what Martha said, those that thrived abided by what she called "rules" - no porn.

I've decided not to get married or even date again, but if I did, my marriage would be with someone of similar faith, and there would be no porn in our marriage. That is one thing "reality" won't change.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 06:55 AM   #101
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 07:41 PM
I don't want to step on anyone's toes, and certainly marriage can be one harsh reality (once again I'm going by observation not experience). But I think it's commendable to have "lofty" ideals about marriage

I also think it's commendable when people make it work and have great marriages in whatever way works best for them
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 07:01 AM   #102
New Yorker
 
the soul waits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: belgium
Posts: 2,528
Local Time: 02:41 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


I want to thank you for your kind words, they are really appreciated. But I do want to reply to the bit in which you said "reality may teach him different ways once he's married". That sounds like my ideals for marriage are unreachable, and that if I ever do get married, I just might see it crumble. That's just not the case. I'm not some life newbie who just fell off the turnip truck. I've had my share of joys and hardships, I've seen "reality"; I know the way life works. I'm 37 years old. I have had my share of ups and downs in the love department. 15 years ago, my brother died, followed the very next year by my son, followed 3 years later by my father. I'd say I know a bit about reality. But I also know what true faith can do; I've seen it in my life and I've seen it in others. I've seen marriages fail, and I've also seen marriages thrive. And contrary to what Martha said, those that thrived abided by what she called "rules" - no porn.

I've decided not to get married or even date again, but if I did, my marriage would be with someone of similar faith, and there would be no porn in our marriage. That is one thing "reality" won't change.
I understand what you're saying and that sentence may have come across as a bit condescending, but that's not at all my intention. I wrote "it *may* teach you different ways, etc", meaning that's not certain. Come to think of it, I probably should have wrote, "might", english is not my native language.
Either way, I didn't mean to picture you as someone who's got his head in the clouds without touching base with reality. I'm sorry if you interpretet that way.
Again, having lofty goals and ideals are commendable, imo, not easy, that's for sure.
__________________
the soul waits is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 07:08 AM   #103
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
A failure to disperse your genetic material makes you an evolutionary cul de sac.
If I didn't believe in God, I might be inclined to agree with you.

But a belief in a God who loves his children, as a whole and individually, comes with the belief that man/woman is more than just a procreator. There is a distinct purpose for every person's life. Some are called to get married and have babies, and some are not. In fact, the most prolific of the New Testament writers, Paul wrote that it is best that people not marry, because they will be able to focus all their attention on God. However, he also said that marying is fine, also.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 07:13 AM   #104
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by the soul waits


I understand what you're saying and that sentence may have come across as a bit condescending, but that's not at all my intention. I wrote "it *may* teach you different ways, etc", meaning that's not certain. Come to think of it, I probably should have wrote, "might", english is not my native language.
Either way, I didn't mean to picture you as someone who's got his head in the clouds without touching base with reality. I'm sorry if you interpretet that way.
Again, having lofty goals and ideals are commendable, imo, not easy, that's for sure.
Thanks. I'm glad you didn't intend it that way. I felt like I needed to ste the record straight, however, because you wouldn't believe how many times people on these forums have treated me as if my beliefs were fine on some "high and lofty spiritual plane", but just wouldn't work in reality, poor naive dear.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-24-2005, 07:33 AM   #105
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
I dunno, blaming porn and porn alone for the ruin of relationships just seems to me like a glossing over of the underlying problems that said relationships have, and most likely did have long before porn even entered the picture. If porn truly was so negative for relationships, then please, those of you who believe that explain to me how there's still many couples who have porn as part of their lives and yet are still going strong?
This is not a blame game. The question is about regulation. We tend to regulate things in a way that tend to improve health, safety and welfare of the populous. Note that little in this thread has actually specified the type of regulation that should be implimented, if any.

Porn is not an obvious evil. It is a seductive one. And for every couple that claims porn helps there relationship, there are multiple individuals viewing porn outside the knowledge of their partner in the relationship.

Ask yourself this question, if you were to meet a guy and he told you that he viewed porn all the time, would it increase your comfort level about having a relationship with him? What would your reaction be if your daughter's boyfriend made the same comment?
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com