Replies

and to prevent or repress those evils which flow from unrestrained passion

I notice you did not quote Benjamin Franklin, one of the greatest of Americans. His passions were quite unrestrained when it came to women. He also attended church regularly, but only to maintain expedient business prospects for himself. Was he an immoral man? On what basis do you presume to judge him, or any other man who may have personal vices, but yet acts morally and ethically, or even heroically in the public sphere. I do not believe it is any of your or CBN's business what lonely businessmen or women watch in the privacy of their hotel rooms. And I do not believe the Founders whom you cite would approve of such puritanical restrictions as you advocate.

“I do not believe it is any of your or CBN’s business what lonely businessmen or women watch in the privacy of their hotel rooms.”

How about child porn, Montag? Is that also a privacy thing, in your opinion?

And don’t come back with the lame, “well, child porn is against the law.”

So is obscenity. It’s either a matter of privacy or a matter of law or a matter of morality.

Which consistent standard do you apply, if any?

"I notice you did not quote Benjamin Franklin, one of the greatest of Americans."

Nor did I quote John Quincy Adams, Fisher Ames, James McHenry, James Wilson, Samuel Adams, Thomas Jefferson and several other founders. They too, addressed the same.

"[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." -- Benjamin Franklin

In Franklin's letter to Thomas Paine; "You yourself may find it easy to live a virtuous life, without the assistance afforded by religion; you having a clear perception of the advantages of virtue, and the disadvantages of vice, and possessing a strength of resolution sufficient to enable you to resist common temptations. But think how great a portion of mankind consists of weak and ignorant men and women, and of inexperienced, inconsiderate youth of both sexes, who have need of the motives of religion to restrain them from vice, to support their virtue, and retain them in the practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great point for its security. And perhaps you are indebted to her originally, that is, to your religious education, for the habits of virtue upon which you now justly value yourself. You might easily display your excellent talents of reasoning upon a less hazardous subject, and thereby obtain a rank with our most distinguished authors. For among us it is not necessary, as among the Hottentots, that a youth, to be raised into the company of men, should prove his manhood by beating his mother. I would advise you, therefore, not to attempt unchaining the tiger, but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other person; whereby you will save yourself a great deal of mortification by the enemies it may raise against you, and perhaps a good deal of regret and repentance."

"He also attended church regularly, but only to maintain expedient business prospects for himself."

I can assure you that he attended church for far more reason than that.

"On what basis do you presume to judge him, or any other man who may have personal vices"

I don't presume to judge him or any other, but if I were, it would be on the basis of 1 Cor 2:15. If you don't understand that, read the verse just above it.

"And I do not believe the Founders whom you cite would approve of such puritanical restrictions as you advocate."

You're certainly entitled to believe what you like, but the Founders made it perfectly clear what restrictions they did, and did not approve of. It is a simple matter to read and comprehend.