Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pornography Is Anything But A Victimless Crime
Concerned Women For America ^ | Dec. 8, 2004 | Cheri Pierson Yecke

Posted on 12/09/2004 1:16:14 PM PST by Lindykim

Pornography is Anything But a 'Victimless Crime'     12/8/2004 By Cheri Pierson Yecke How many more expert studies do we need to convince ourselves of this fact?

Jud Fry -- one of the characters in the Rodgers and Hammerstein musical Oklahoma! lives in a shack that is papered with pornographic images. He is a loner, lacks social skills, and is feared by his neighbors. He is clearly capable of murder. This insight into the character of a porn addict hit the Broadway stage in 1943.

Fast forward to 2004. A sexual assault and several attempted abductions of girls in the St. Paul, Minnesota, area are allegedly the work of 19-year-old Ryan Mely, who has been charged (for starters) with second-degree criminal sexual conduct. He apparently was a loner who was feared by his neighbors. Jud Fry is a fictitious character who bought his porn from an itinerant peddler. How did Ryan Mely get his start? Apparently, pornography was a family pastime. While some dads bond with their kids by fishing or playing hockey together, it appears that Mely and his father (a convicted sex offender) shared an interest in pornography. It was reported that sexually explicit material was found at the family home and on their computer.

Is anyone really surprised that pornography is involved here? It has been 60 years since a Broadway musical portrayed what social scientists and criminal analysis have now found to be true -- addiction to pornography can lead to violent sexual behavior. Dr. Victor Cline, a clinical psychologist and expert on sexual addictions, has identified four stages of progression among his patients.

The first stage is addiction, where the attraction to porn is overpowering and the viewer keeps craving more. The next stage is an escalation to more shocking and deviant images, as the earlier ones have lost their power to stimulate. Third is desensitization, where anything earlier seen as disturbing and repulsive becomes viewed as commonplace. Finally, satisfaction cannot be reached unless the perpetrator begins acting out the activities witnessed in the pornography. In effect, fantasy must become reality.

The events in which Mely was allegedly involved appear to follow this pattern. Perhaps the same is true for Alfonso Rodriguez, the man who allegedly abducted and murdered Dru Sjodin. Rodriguez apparently had an infatuation with Dru, who worked at Victoria's Secret, an upscale lingerie shop. On several occasions he allegedly called the store where she worked, asking for her by name.

Victoria's Secret is well known for its racy, soft-porn "fashion show" where voluptuous young models strut the runways in revealing lingerie. The liberal National Organization for Women called it "exploitative" and the conservative Concerned Women for America condemned it as a "high-tech striptease." Regularly protested by both sides of the political spectrum, the company announced in April that it will no longer air this event

The last Victoria's Secret "fashion show" aired on network television November 19, 2003. Dru was abducted three days later. Could it be that Alfonso Rodriguez, a convicted sex offender, watched the show and was propelled into Dr. Cline's fourth stage of sexual deviance? This is a question his judge and jury may consider.

In an interview the night before his 1989 execution, serial killer Ted Bundy revealed the influence of pornography on his life.

A case study for Cline's four stages of addiction, Bundy started his descent into sexual deviance and murder with magazines he found in the neighbor's trash. His addiction escalated until he felt compelled to act out his desires in more than 30 murders that were accompanied with violent sexual acts.

He warned Americans: "There are those loose in [your] towns and communities, like me, whose dangerous impulses are being fueled, day in and day out, by violence in the media, in its various forms -- particularly sexualized violence ... . There are lots of other kids playing in the streets around the country today who are going to be dead tomorrow, and the next day, because other young people are reading and seeing the kinds of things that are available in the media today."

Abundant evidence has demonstrated the tragic impact of pornography. How many more expert studies do we need to convince ourselves of this fact? The elections of 2004 have sent politicians the message that morals matter, so now is the time to focus on the impact of pornography -- the so-called "victimless crime."

Cheri Pierson Yecke is a Distinguished Senior Fellow for Education and Social Policy at the Center of the American Experiment, a conservative think tank in Minneapolis. She is a former Minnesota commissioner of education and is author of The War Against Excellence. This article first appeared in the Minneapolis Star Tribune. Used with permission.  

Concerned Women for America 1015 Fifteenth St. N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, D.C. 20005 Phone: (202) 488-7000 Fax: (202) 488-0806 E-mail: mail@cwfa.org    


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: cwa; filth; garbage; morality; porn; puritanpatrol; talibornagain; thoughtpolice; vile
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 641-651 next last
To: Egg; All

www.pureintimacy.org Check it out. Again, I say, we all have the right, as adults, to porn, fatty foods and overabundance of alcohol and cigarettes. Some can kill your body, some can whittle away at your soul. It's just important to be informed and consider your influences, and how they may be desensitizing you.


521 posted on 12/10/2004 10:23:58 AM PST by julymoon (Influences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 410 | View Replies]

To: Theophilus
I would never let my children play in the street so I would be a d@^n fool to fight for the right to play in it myself, while saying that it is a noble thing to sacrifice security for freedom!

Silly analogy. Playing in the street is not illegal just to protect foolish people from their own stupidity, it's illegal because playing in the street causes accidents and therefore damages other parties.

522 posted on 12/10/2004 10:36:25 AM PST by Modernman (Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. --Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter

Libertarians......real "daydream-believers" LOL!


523 posted on 12/10/2004 11:12:16 AM PST by Lindykim (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 440 | View Replies]

To: Modernman

snip...I'm just taking yout logic to its natural conclusion: if looking at other people performing sex acts with their consent is the



No, what you're Really trying to do, is to devise a meaningless counter issue in an effort to absolve yourself from being guilty of commiting "legal" peeping tomism. Why? Because although you commit it, you don't want to be thought of as the sort of person who engages in that sort of depravity.


524 posted on 12/10/2004 11:19:37 AM PST by Lindykim (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 448 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim
No, what you're Really trying to do, is to devise a meaningless counter issue in an effort to absolve yourself from being guilty of commiting "legal" peeping tomism.

If something is legal, how can one be guilty of it? If a friend lets me borrow his car, am I guilty of "legal" grand theft auto?

If someone lets me observe them engaged in a sexual act, what am I guilty of?

525 posted on 12/10/2004 11:28:54 AM PST by Modernman (Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. --Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 524 | View Replies]

To: Theophilus

I don't get that at all? What does playing in the street have to do with anything?


526 posted on 12/10/2004 12:03:52 PM PST by Time is now (We'll live to see it......Does anyone see it yet?....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies]

To: dascallie

You belong over at DU, since you can't articulate an intelligent response, and resort emotional squawking without facts and to childish name calling.


527 posted on 12/10/2004 12:11:08 PM PST by Time is now (We'll live to see it......Does anyone see it yet?....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 478 | View Replies]

To: Time is now

Go away.


528 posted on 12/10/2004 12:13:36 PM PST by dascallie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 527 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
So you agree that playing in the street is foolish, stupid, could cause accidents and could damage other parties.

Let's assume that I am a porn addict and while I'm playing on the "Information Super Highway" I innocently view, with satisfaction, a voluptuous 17 year old daughter/sister of somebody who cares, in provocative poses, having lied about her age or whose pimp lied about her age. Is that an accident? Am I a party to child pornography? Is ignorance an excuse?

529 posted on 12/10/2004 1:08:13 PM PST by Theophilus (Save Little Democrats, Stop Abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

Comment #530 Removed by Moderator

To: Theophilus
Let's assume that I am a porn addict and while I'm playing on the "Information Super Highway" I innocently view, with satisfaction, a voluptuous 17 year old daughter/sister of somebody who cares, in provocative poses, having lied about her age or whose pimp lied about her age. Is that an accident?

On your part? Sure, it's an accident. If you weren't looking for child porn, that is an accident.

Am I a party to child pornography?

No. One of my poker buddies prosecutes child porn cases for the DOJ. It is a crime to knowingly receive, produce or distribute child porn. The key word is knowing. If you look at a picture of a girl you think is of legal age, you have committed no crime.

Is ignorance an excuse?

Ignorance of the law is not an excuse, but igorance of fact generally is. If you don't know what you're looking at is child porn, you do not posses the requisite mental state to be in violation of child porn laws.

531 posted on 12/10/2004 1:40:12 PM PST by Modernman (Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. --Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 529 | View Replies]

To: Frapster
Actually - the only ones making associations between the 'religious right' and Islam are those that have a secual agenda and fear religion of any kind.

Pizza courier 'targeted' Amsterdam sex zone

From the article...

The emails warned that "terrorists in Amsterdam East" were plotting an attack on the Wallen area in Amsterdam, De Telegraaf reported. Muslim extremists, the paper said, were allegedly furious at the lack of morals in the prostitution zone.

532 posted on 12/10/2004 2:15:24 PM PST by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 463 | View Replies]

To: dascallie
You keep bringing up 14 year old children being sucked into the porn industry. You have been told many times that the porn industry has no incentive whatsoever to use anyone under age. Here is an example of how serious the laws on the books already are in reguards to child porn and how hard they will hit even people that simply download it.

Read this and let me know if you still think that porn producers have any incentive at all to use underage women.

Inside Operation Candyman, the FBI's crusade to sweep the Net clean of child abuse.

He was a stand-up Marine, a beloved cop, and a local hero — until the government branded him part of the largest kid porn ring in history.

Under the federal sentencing guidelines, his crime will yield a maximum five-year sentence, with leeway for a downward departure by the sentencing judge. On the basis of Vaughn's excellent record in the military and as a police officer, the prosecutor agreed to request a downward departure. The judge will also make a recommendation to send Vaughn to either a federal prison or a psychiatric correctional facility. As part of the plea agreement, Vaughn waived his right to appeal the sentence. He also arranged to enroll in a group treatment program after his incarceration. Under Megan's law, he will be a registered sex offender for the rest of his life.

533 posted on 12/10/2004 2:39:14 PM PST by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 492 | View Replies]

To: dascallie
Your personal attacks merely reveal the weakness and lack of supporting evidence for your arguments. Actually, to be more precise, they reveal the weakness and lack of supporting evidence for your statements. For something to be an argument, it requires supporting sentences; especially things citing evidence.
534 posted on 12/10/2004 2:58:34 PM PST by NJ_gent (Conservatism begins at home. Security begins at the border. Please, someone, secure our borders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: tutstar
"Don't even start the Communist/Socialist censorship bit."

Why not? Should we not learn from the mistakes of others? Ask someone in China about how wonderful government censorship of the internet is.

"providing a specific domain for them wouldn't be that big of an imposition for them, no doubt they could afford the change of domain name."

There are lots of things that lots of companies could afford. That's no excuse for imposing government regulation on things the government has no business regulating - like worldwide internetworked systems. Microsoft could certainly afford to be forced to build a school for every 1 million copies of Windows sold - but that doesn't mean they should be forced to do so by the government. Not liking an industry is no excuse for trying to legislate the heck out of it. Like it or not, these are businesses operating within the law. Making up laws to increase their expenses while increasing government power over mankind's greatest accomplishment for free speech (the internet) just doesn't seem like much of a laudable goal to me.

"Sometimes out of common decency the MSM doesn't even show certain footage such as the recent hostage beheadings in Iraq."

Indeed, yet for those who do wish to see things without the convenient filters of the MSM and the FCC, internet sites exist to provide free access to virtually any information one seeks. I believe this to be a good thing as it prevents any government or company from controlling the information which allows citizens in a free society to make informed, intelligent decisions.
535 posted on 12/10/2004 3:08:32 PM PST by NJ_gent (Conservatism begins at home. Security begins at the border. Please, someone, secure our borders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]

To: Theophilus
"If the choice is between being a clean slave or a filthy slave, I'll take clean slave option."

I choose the third option: Live free or die.

The obese man, the drunkard, the gambler, and the pervert are indeed as free as they wish to be. For each one, plenty of help exists for them to get past what might otherwise seem to be uncontrollable urges. You need to be careful about tossing around the concept of them not being free. If they're not free, then they're not responsible for their actions. If they're not responsible for their actions, then drunk drivers and perverts who molest or rape cannot be held accountable for their actions. Personal responsibility is the cornerstone of law and order. If and when the time comes that no one is responsible for themselves, then the Great Experiment has ended in utter failure; lost to the irrepressible whimsicality of man's feeble and lazy nature.
536 posted on 12/10/2004 3:14:48 PM PST by NJ_gent (Conservatism begins at home. Security begins at the border. Please, someone, secure our borders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim
I would not be totally certain that Jud Fry was a fictitous character, or at least totally made up.

I once read that Lynn Riggs who wrote the play, based all the characters on real people.

537 posted on 12/10/2004 3:20:34 PM PST by Shanda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bvw
"Nowdays, as I understand, some US Judges have allowed one-sided agreements where in some silly moment a person AGREES to something that's a completely lopsided deal. Still would meet your criterion, but not mine, nor history's."

This is a simple concept of "laissez-faire". Indeed, the economy in the US, largely capitalist since its inception, has been marked by its general laissez-faire attitude. It's a concept which lies at the heart of libertarian economic policy. Pure capitalism would require pure laissez-faire policies.

"Death contracts should be illegal, in my view. That's where the beneficiary receives payment on someone's death. We call such contracts "Life Insurance". Well, I'mm all for burial coverage, and some few limited years of income in recourse -- say three to seven."

My boss has a toddler and another child on the way. Should he die tomorrow, your suggestion that his life insurance policy be illegal would leave her with lots of bills and no way to pay them. This would mean that both kids would grow up with neither parent (dad dead, mom working 12-hours a day). Now, assuming that they're "allowed" to have a "death contract" that pays her bills for the next seven years, that just leaves the two kids with no parents for half their childhood. How super. This assumes, of course, that she's able to get work at all. Otherwise, bankruptcy and welfare would likely be in her future. Hmm... free market insurance or government welfare... Not a tough choice there.

"It's a motive for murder or suicide or giving up when one is very sick."

So is love. Let's outlaw love. So is marriage. Let's outlaw marriage. So is inheritance, let's (do like Dems want to do) outlaw inheritance (100% "Death Tax"). You can't outlaw things because they might theoretically be a motive for something bad. This, yet again, removes personal responsibility from individuals. If a woman kills her husband for the insurance money, it's not the insurance company's fault, nor the insurance policy's fault - it's her fault and she should go to jail.
538 posted on 12/10/2004 3:28:52 PM PST by NJ_gent (Conservatism begins at home. Security begins at the border. Please, someone, secure our borders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: Lindykim

Christ told us that the gates of Hell will not prevail against His church (Matthew 16:18). I think it's a safe bet that Satan is using pornography (among many other tools) as one method to destroy the Family - thereby weakening the Church from the outside.

It is no secret that pornography destroys lives. It divides couples, it devalues people, and it creates false expectations. It's these false expectations, that when people are inundated with it, have trouble gaining and maintaining relationships.


539 posted on 12/10/2004 3:32:29 PM PST by ItsOurTimeNow ("Forth now, and fear no darkness!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeffAtlanta
"If we really want to fight an addiction that ruins relationships and destroys young people [instead of porno], obesity would be the one to go after....

Churches don't crusade against obesity however, since that would drive away many of the members. I've heard my pastor mention in passing that we should take care of our bodies, but has never seriously attacked it or devoted a series of sermons to it."

Stop it bro. You're embarrassing yourself AND Free Republic with a degree of idiocy that rivals DU.

540 posted on 12/10/2004 3:33:25 PM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 487 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 641-651 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson